From: The Telegraph, November 1 , 2011
Fight for Mahishasura on JNU campus
OUR CORRESPONDENT
The painting by Lal Ratnakar that was displayed on Mahishasura Day
New Delhi, Oct. 31: A row over a Mahishasura poster that extolled the mythological demon over Goddess Durga deepened today at Jawaharlal Nehru University, with the student accused of publishing it sending a legal notice to the authorities.
The All India Backward Students Forum had published the poster on Navami, October 5, reproducing with it an article from the Hindi-English journal Forward.
Titled “Kiski puja kar rahe hain Bahujan (Whom are the backward castes worshipping)”, the article by Prem Kumar Mani theorises that Mahishasura was the asura (non-Aryan) ruler of the ancient Banga kingdom and was assassinated by Durga, an Aryan agent.
It says the garland of skulls Durga wears symbolises the massacre of the indigenous people, who today make up the backward castes, by the invading Aryans. It calls on the backward castes not to worship Durga, whom it calls a symbol of their subjugation.
Chief proctor H.B. Bohidar said the article’s circulation during Durga Puja had offended many students, who sent written complaints. Members of RSS student wing ABVP attacked a Forum meeting on the campus at 1am on October 9 and beat up its members, including women.
The university sent show-cause notices to Forum president Jitendra Yadav and two ABVP supporters, giving them till today to reply. The ABVP men sent in regular replies but Yadav sent a legal notice.
The show-cause notice had asked Yadav why he had caused disharmony, leading to violence, among students by publishing the poster during a festival. It also asked him to explain his act of “serious misconduct and indiscipline”.
Yadav’s legal notice argues that “everyone has the fundamental right of scrutiny of religious ethos”, his lawyer Nitin Meshram said.
“The poster is well supported by evidence from the Puranas and B.R. Ambedkar’s works. The university has not pointed out who is offended by it. The poster was published by the organisation, not an individual, and is well within the reasonable restrictions of the Constitution.”
Yadav alleged an attempt to push him and other backward caste students out of the campus. “We will launch a movement on the campus and in court if we are punished.”
Bohidar said the administration would consult its legal cell. “If we find their involvement in any offence only superficial, we can let them off with a warning. If it is deeper, we can even rusticate them.”
The campus being traditionally a Left and Far Left stronghold, many student organisations have come out in Yadav’s support. Around 200 students celebrated Mahishasura Day on October 24. A painting of Mahishasura by Lal Ratnakar was displayed.
|
October 31, 2011
The 1984 Pogrom and calls for justice of ‘other' victims of similar massacres (Ravinder Kaur)
We must not allow the pain and suffering of the Sikh victims to be transformed into a political instrument to mute calls for justice for the ‘other' victims of similarly orchestrated massacres.
More than a quarter century on, not much remains of ‘1984' — shorthand for one of the largest pogroms in India's postcolonial history when thousands of Sikhs were massacred in retribution for Prime Minister Indira Gandhi's assassination — in the public memory. The voices of victims and eyewitnesses one often heard in courtrooms have almost retired in exhaustion. The names of state-appointed serial commissions to establish the facts on ground have by now joined footnotes of history in a long line of ineffective judicial commissions of similar nature. And more remarkably, the miscarriage of justice through long-winded judicial processes where eyewitnesses routinely turn hostile due to threats, incentives, pressures exerted by fixers, or because of plain weariness has ceased evoking any mass outrage.
[. . .]
Full text here
More than a quarter century on, not much remains of ‘1984' — shorthand for one of the largest pogroms in India's postcolonial history when thousands of Sikhs were massacred in retribution for Prime Minister Indira Gandhi's assassination — in the public memory. The voices of victims and eyewitnesses one often heard in courtrooms have almost retired in exhaustion. The names of state-appointed serial commissions to establish the facts on ground have by now joined footnotes of history in a long line of ineffective judicial commissions of similar nature. And more remarkably, the miscarriage of justice through long-winded judicial processes where eyewitnesses routinely turn hostile due to threats, incentives, pressures exerted by fixers, or because of plain weariness has ceased evoking any mass outrage.
[. . .]
Full text here
October 30, 2011
The chariot-rider
From: Daily Times, October 21, 2011
by J Sri Raman
Advani’s repeated attempts to reinvent himself in the image of an Atal Bihari Vajpayee, a more widely ‘acceptable’ candidate for the prime minister’s post than any other leader in the party or the parivar (the far-right family), are no secret
When the chips are down, the tireless warrior summons his trusty chariot again. Lal Krishna Advani finds himself back on a vehicle of mythological wars driven by a more modern fuel.
This is the sixth Rath Yatra (chariot ride) to be undertaken by the veteran of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and a former deputy prime minister. It all started over 21 years ago, when he proposed in a party forum a Pada Yatra (a pilgrimage on foot) to rouse public awareness of the promising Babri Masjid issue. Pramod Mahajan, a bright young spark of the BJP then who made an impact by being one of the first politicians to flaunt a mobile phone, thought that the times demanded a more technology-aided travel mode. Thus was born Advani’s first rath, an imported Toyota mini-bus.
The yatra proved a big success. Launched on September 25, 1990, in Gujarat’s symbolically chosen Somnath, it did not last even a month as Advani was arrested in the then Lalu Prasad-ruled Bihar on October 23. But it had left by then a long enough trail of bloody communal strife, and was to lead to the barbaric demolition of the Babri Masjid two years later, bringing unprecedented political benefits to the BJP. Advani has not looked back since then.
Popular television serial ‘Mahabharat’, which ran from October 1988 to June 1990, had made the rath a reminder of India’s past glory, especially to ‘cultural nationalists’ of the BJP kind. Advani took it all forward. In 1993, he went on a Janadesh (popular mandate) Yatra, to protest in particular against the proposed constitutional 80th Amendment Bill, seeking to delink religion from politics. Followed by a Swarna Jayanti (golden anniversary) Yatra to mark 50 years of India’s independence.
Then came the Bharat Uday (India shining) Yatra from Kanyakumari to Amritsar and from Rajkot to Jagannath Puri in March 2004, on the eve of a general election. This was the least rewarding of Advani’s rath yatras, with the ‘Shining India’ slogan actually losing the election for his party. The Bharat Suraksha Yatra (for defence of India) against the Congress-led government’s policies on terrorism did not yield a political bonanza either.
Advani seemed to entertain higher hopes, however, from the current Jan Chetana (popular awareness) Yatra directed against the series of corruption scams rocking the country over the recent period. The 38-day chariot ride, launched on October 11, to cover over 10,000 km, is proving far more challenging than he might have foreseen.
Technologically, the rath represents a remarkable improvement. A luxurious Volvo bus has replaced the Toyota, and it boasts fittings and facilities including a lift and internet connectivity, besides a kitchen and space for at least six co-passengers. Unlike in the past instances, the yatra will take in a few flights as well as it covers 23 states, including the North-East and the Andaman-Nicobar islands. But there have been enough problems and bickering within the party and its National Democratic Alliance (NDA) to make the ride more than a little bumpy.
Speculation about Advani’s real intentions has been louder thus far than about the possible political impact of the yatra. His repeated attempts to reinvent himself in the image of an Atal Bihari Vajpayee, a more widely ‘acceptable’ candidate for the prime minister’s post than any other leader in the party or the parivar (the far-right family), are no secret, really. The attempts have failed so far. Advani is trying harder this time by avoiding stopovers altogether on this yatra at either Ayodhya or Somnath.
The yatra, however, is proving accident-prone indeed — even in a literal sense. Soon after the yatra’s start, the rath developed a snag that caused nausea for Advani’s colleagues and obliged him to get a standby chariot from Karnataka. The rath also got stuck under a railway bridge near Patna. But these were trivial problems, compared to other troubles.
One of these was reflected in a joke doing the rounds. Advani, it is said, would have done better to choose a Tata Nano car, known also as the ‘people’s car’ for its puny size and capacity, and thus give his party a pro-aam aadmi (common man) image. The crack does not conceal a reference to the fact of a special rapport between the House of Tatas and Narendra Modi who gave the small car project a place of pride and privilege in his Gujarat after West Bengal had shunted it out.
The reference was really to competitive politics between Advani and Modi, to which the country has been an amused witness over recent months. Advani’s fervent anti-corruption yatra began after Modi’s fast, believe it or not, for “communal harmony”. And the yatra, scheduled to start originally from Gujarat, was shifted to Bihar where chief minister Nitish Kumar has been chary of sharing even an election dais with Modi. The strongman of Gujarat, meanwhile, is continuing with a series of fasts for his strikingly ironic cause.
Advani has been denied the reassurance of support from the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), patriarch of the parivar, as one of its oldest activists. The RSS, in fact, is said to have insisted on several other BJP leaders accompanying him on his yatra, to ensure that every one of them gets a fair share of fake anti-graft credit.
Nothing, however, has proved a bigger speed-breaker for the yatra than the corruption scams in Karnataka, the only BJP-ruled state in the south. Former chief minister B S Yeddyurappa, overthrown after an ombudsman’s report, was arrested in a case of land grab just days after pilgrim Advani’s progress towards “probity in public life”. Advani has disavowed any soft corner for Yeddyurappa, but we will wait to see if rhetoric against corruption stays the same after his yatra enters Karnataka.
It is a different kind of nausea that seizes the country, as it watches the spectacle of a spurious far-right war on corruption.
The writer is a journalist based in Chennai, India. A peace activist, he is also the author of a sheaf of poems titled At Gunpoint
by J Sri Raman
Advani’s repeated attempts to reinvent himself in the image of an Atal Bihari Vajpayee, a more widely ‘acceptable’ candidate for the prime minister’s post than any other leader in the party or the parivar (the far-right family), are no secret
When the chips are down, the tireless warrior summons his trusty chariot again. Lal Krishna Advani finds himself back on a vehicle of mythological wars driven by a more modern fuel.
This is the sixth Rath Yatra (chariot ride) to be undertaken by the veteran of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and a former deputy prime minister. It all started over 21 years ago, when he proposed in a party forum a Pada Yatra (a pilgrimage on foot) to rouse public awareness of the promising Babri Masjid issue. Pramod Mahajan, a bright young spark of the BJP then who made an impact by being one of the first politicians to flaunt a mobile phone, thought that the times demanded a more technology-aided travel mode. Thus was born Advani’s first rath, an imported Toyota mini-bus.
The yatra proved a big success. Launched on September 25, 1990, in Gujarat’s symbolically chosen Somnath, it did not last even a month as Advani was arrested in the then Lalu Prasad-ruled Bihar on October 23. But it had left by then a long enough trail of bloody communal strife, and was to lead to the barbaric demolition of the Babri Masjid two years later, bringing unprecedented political benefits to the BJP. Advani has not looked back since then.
Popular television serial ‘Mahabharat’, which ran from October 1988 to June 1990, had made the rath a reminder of India’s past glory, especially to ‘cultural nationalists’ of the BJP kind. Advani took it all forward. In 1993, he went on a Janadesh (popular mandate) Yatra, to protest in particular against the proposed constitutional 80th Amendment Bill, seeking to delink religion from politics. Followed by a Swarna Jayanti (golden anniversary) Yatra to mark 50 years of India’s independence.
Then came the Bharat Uday (India shining) Yatra from Kanyakumari to Amritsar and from Rajkot to Jagannath Puri in March 2004, on the eve of a general election. This was the least rewarding of Advani’s rath yatras, with the ‘Shining India’ slogan actually losing the election for his party. The Bharat Suraksha Yatra (for defence of India) against the Congress-led government’s policies on terrorism did not yield a political bonanza either.
Advani seemed to entertain higher hopes, however, from the current Jan Chetana (popular awareness) Yatra directed against the series of corruption scams rocking the country over the recent period. The 38-day chariot ride, launched on October 11, to cover over 10,000 km, is proving far more challenging than he might have foreseen.
Technologically, the rath represents a remarkable improvement. A luxurious Volvo bus has replaced the Toyota, and it boasts fittings and facilities including a lift and internet connectivity, besides a kitchen and space for at least six co-passengers. Unlike in the past instances, the yatra will take in a few flights as well as it covers 23 states, including the North-East and the Andaman-Nicobar islands. But there have been enough problems and bickering within the party and its National Democratic Alliance (NDA) to make the ride more than a little bumpy.
Speculation about Advani’s real intentions has been louder thus far than about the possible political impact of the yatra. His repeated attempts to reinvent himself in the image of an Atal Bihari Vajpayee, a more widely ‘acceptable’ candidate for the prime minister’s post than any other leader in the party or the parivar (the far-right family), are no secret, really. The attempts have failed so far. Advani is trying harder this time by avoiding stopovers altogether on this yatra at either Ayodhya or Somnath.
The yatra, however, is proving accident-prone indeed — even in a literal sense. Soon after the yatra’s start, the rath developed a snag that caused nausea for Advani’s colleagues and obliged him to get a standby chariot from Karnataka. The rath also got stuck under a railway bridge near Patna. But these were trivial problems, compared to other troubles.
One of these was reflected in a joke doing the rounds. Advani, it is said, would have done better to choose a Tata Nano car, known also as the ‘people’s car’ for its puny size and capacity, and thus give his party a pro-aam aadmi (common man) image. The crack does not conceal a reference to the fact of a special rapport between the House of Tatas and Narendra Modi who gave the small car project a place of pride and privilege in his Gujarat after West Bengal had shunted it out.
The reference was really to competitive politics between Advani and Modi, to which the country has been an amused witness over recent months. Advani’s fervent anti-corruption yatra began after Modi’s fast, believe it or not, for “communal harmony”. And the yatra, scheduled to start originally from Gujarat, was shifted to Bihar where chief minister Nitish Kumar has been chary of sharing even an election dais with Modi. The strongman of Gujarat, meanwhile, is continuing with a series of fasts for his strikingly ironic cause.
Advani has been denied the reassurance of support from the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), patriarch of the parivar, as one of its oldest activists. The RSS, in fact, is said to have insisted on several other BJP leaders accompanying him on his yatra, to ensure that every one of them gets a fair share of fake anti-graft credit.
Nothing, however, has proved a bigger speed-breaker for the yatra than the corruption scams in Karnataka, the only BJP-ruled state in the south. Former chief minister B S Yeddyurappa, overthrown after an ombudsman’s report, was arrested in a case of land grab just days after pilgrim Advani’s progress towards “probity in public life”. Advani has disavowed any soft corner for Yeddyurappa, but we will wait to see if rhetoric against corruption stays the same after his yatra enters Karnataka.
It is a different kind of nausea that seizes the country, as it watches the spectacle of a spurious far-right war on corruption.
The writer is a journalist based in Chennai, India. A peace activist, he is also the author of a sheaf of poems titled At Gunpoint
Unraveling the Truth: Book Review: Godse's Children by Subhash Gatade
by Ram Puniyani
(Book Reviewed: Godse’s Children- Hindutva Terror in India, Pharos Media, Delhi, Pages 400, Rs 360, Pb)
Terrorist violence has been one of the major problems of recent times. This phenomenon came to popular notice more so after the 9/11 attack on WTC, which was followed by, apart from other things, popularization of the terms ‘Islamic Terror’, ‘Jehdi terror’. The popular perception associating Terrorism with Islam and Muslims dominated the ‘social common sense’ and acts of terror got associated with Islam and Muslims. It is in this context that when two Bajrang dal workers died while making bombs in Nanded, Maharashtra, the Maharashtra ATS, did not pursue the investigation to its logical conclusion to unravel the whole truth. It is in this light that when most of the acts of terror took place around Parbhani, Jalna, Aurangabad, Ajmer, Mecca Masjid, Malegaon, and Samjhauta Express blast, that authorities rushed to investigate those acts on the lines that ‘all terrorists are Muslims’, many a innocent Muslim youth were arrested and some of them released much later for the lack of proper evidence, whatsoever, by which time the lives of most of them were ruined.
It was Hemant Karkare, who meticulously investigated the Malegaon blast and, much against the intimidation from the likes of Narendra Modi and Bal Thackeray, put forward the truth of involvement of Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur, Swami Dayanand Pandey, Lt Col Purohit and other groups associated with RSS ideology. With further perusal of the issue gradually the role of Hindutva groups Sanatan Sanstha, Abhinav Bharat and even some members of RSS started coming to light, in cases of blasts which occurred in front of mosques when congregation was just over, or in Samjhauta express blast.
This is the backdrop in which one welcomes the meticulous and well articulated contribution by Subhash Gatade. Gatade has been consistently writing against the sectarian politics of Hindutva forces-RSS combine. This book was contemplated in this context, when the Hindutva elements were exploding bombs here and there and the investigation authorities were looking the other way around. The result was that the likes of sadhvi, swamis and their associates, were merrily getting away without getting any punishment. This comprehensive volume is very strong on investigation of different episodes of act of terror, covering most of the blasts done by Hindutva elements, the major being the span of blasts from Nanded blasts 2006 to the confessions of Swami Aseemanand. Each of these acts has been presented and the immaculate evidence of the involvement of RSS affiliates and those inspired by the RSS ideology of Hindu Nation is laid bare in an incontestable way. After the reading of even the few chapters of the book, one realizes how misplaced has been the investigation in these cases, how distorted has been the social common sense of people and the authorities in these matters.
To add to the strength of the book, we have an apt introduction by Dr. Shamsul Islam, who himself is an authority on RSS. This is an important part of the book and outlines the ideology of RSS, its agenda of Hindu nation, its clever ways of instigating violence and how its structure has been kept fluid enough to keep it insulated from the impact of its members who indulge in violence. The book demands in a forthright manner from RSS, the list of members who were asked to leave or have left due to their involvement in acts of terror. The RSS chief had stated that RSS does not indulge in violence; and those of its members who were indulging in it have already left or have been told to leave. One knows that starting from Nathuram Godse to Swami Assemanand, were the part of RSS as an organization and as vehicles of its agenda and work. It came to be claimed that they have ‘left’ RSS. This is a shrewd and clever arrangement and the book lays bare this methodology of the RSS which controls innumerable organizations to actualize its agenda. The confusion between the terms Hinduism and Hindutva has been elaborated competently. Gatade does well to discuss the definition of the complex term, ‘terrorism’ and also incorporates the state terrorism in his exposition. The latter is generally ignored in the discourse of terrorism as such.
What emerges from this book is that the saffron terror, Hindutva terror, has twin foundations. One, it is a sort of response; a revenge to many acts of terror by the groups identified as Muslim groups, and two this terror trail has been brought up to pursue the agenda of Hindu nation to target the Muslim minorities. These acts, with their anti-Muslim focus are to achieve Hindu rashtra according to their plan. The author brings to fore the influence of RSS ideology in army, the role of Bhosla Military School, virtually controlled by RSS, and the role of some army officers in facilitating the acts of terror by these groups. Lt. Col Purohit, the accused in Malegaon blast, who also supplied RDX from army stores to the Hindutva terror groups, is one such officer, and he may tip of the iceberg. This has a very frightening prospect for our democracy.
The book debunks the popular perceptions which links Islam and Muslims to acts of terror and makes it clear that acts of terror are politically motivated actions with different agendas. The fascination of RSS with the fascist methods being pursued by Israel and the role of Mossad in particular is the high point of the book. Our investigation agencies need to take a cue from this and put their investigations on more professional lines.
The book takes a broad overview of Hindutva politics also and the role of media and the international connections of Hindutva politics are also presented in detail. What is missing is a time line of Hidnutva terror. Such a time line would have made it easy from the reader to see the whole picture in perspective. An Introduction by the author, putting the book in proper context and summarizing the main arguments of the book would have been a valuable addition to this otherwise most timely and revealing contribution from this journalist-activist.
This work is a serious attempt to piece together the statements of the RSS functionaries and the news items in some of the periodicals to come to the conclusions. It is a comprehensive presentation, filling the gaps in popular knowledge about the real causes of terror attacks in India. Pharos Media, the publishers need to be complemented for publishing this second book on the topic, the first one being “Who killed Karkare?” by S. M. Mushrif, which again was an eye opener. Godse’s Children, an apt name for the book, is a must for all those who seek truth in contemporary times, particularly when truth is being suppressed deliberately in pursuit of sectarian agendas. This compendium will go a long way to shape the popular opinion in a correct direction.
(Book Reviewed: Godse’s Children- Hindutva Terror in India, Pharos Media, Delhi, Pages 400, Rs 360, Pb)
Terrorist violence has been one of the major problems of recent times. This phenomenon came to popular notice more so after the 9/11 attack on WTC, which was followed by, apart from other things, popularization of the terms ‘Islamic Terror’, ‘Jehdi terror’. The popular perception associating Terrorism with Islam and Muslims dominated the ‘social common sense’ and acts of terror got associated with Islam and Muslims. It is in this context that when two Bajrang dal workers died while making bombs in Nanded, Maharashtra, the Maharashtra ATS, did not pursue the investigation to its logical conclusion to unravel the whole truth. It is in this light that when most of the acts of terror took place around Parbhani, Jalna, Aurangabad, Ajmer, Mecca Masjid, Malegaon, and Samjhauta Express blast, that authorities rushed to investigate those acts on the lines that ‘all terrorists are Muslims’, many a innocent Muslim youth were arrested and some of them released much later for the lack of proper evidence, whatsoever, by which time the lives of most of them were ruined.
It was Hemant Karkare, who meticulously investigated the Malegaon blast and, much against the intimidation from the likes of Narendra Modi and Bal Thackeray, put forward the truth of involvement of Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur, Swami Dayanand Pandey, Lt Col Purohit and other groups associated with RSS ideology. With further perusal of the issue gradually the role of Hindutva groups Sanatan Sanstha, Abhinav Bharat and even some members of RSS started coming to light, in cases of blasts which occurred in front of mosques when congregation was just over, or in Samjhauta express blast.
This is the backdrop in which one welcomes the meticulous and well articulated contribution by Subhash Gatade. Gatade has been consistently writing against the sectarian politics of Hindutva forces-RSS combine. This book was contemplated in this context, when the Hindutva elements were exploding bombs here and there and the investigation authorities were looking the other way around. The result was that the likes of sadhvi, swamis and their associates, were merrily getting away without getting any punishment. This comprehensive volume is very strong on investigation of different episodes of act of terror, covering most of the blasts done by Hindutva elements, the major being the span of blasts from Nanded blasts 2006 to the confessions of Swami Aseemanand. Each of these acts has been presented and the immaculate evidence of the involvement of RSS affiliates and those inspired by the RSS ideology of Hindu Nation is laid bare in an incontestable way. After the reading of even the few chapters of the book, one realizes how misplaced has been the investigation in these cases, how distorted has been the social common sense of people and the authorities in these matters.
To add to the strength of the book, we have an apt introduction by Dr. Shamsul Islam, who himself is an authority on RSS. This is an important part of the book and outlines the ideology of RSS, its agenda of Hindu nation, its clever ways of instigating violence and how its structure has been kept fluid enough to keep it insulated from the impact of its members who indulge in violence. The book demands in a forthright manner from RSS, the list of members who were asked to leave or have left due to their involvement in acts of terror. The RSS chief had stated that RSS does not indulge in violence; and those of its members who were indulging in it have already left or have been told to leave. One knows that starting from Nathuram Godse to Swami Assemanand, were the part of RSS as an organization and as vehicles of its agenda and work. It came to be claimed that they have ‘left’ RSS. This is a shrewd and clever arrangement and the book lays bare this methodology of the RSS which controls innumerable organizations to actualize its agenda. The confusion between the terms Hinduism and Hindutva has been elaborated competently. Gatade does well to discuss the definition of the complex term, ‘terrorism’ and also incorporates the state terrorism in his exposition. The latter is generally ignored in the discourse of terrorism as such.
What emerges from this book is that the saffron terror, Hindutva terror, has twin foundations. One, it is a sort of response; a revenge to many acts of terror by the groups identified as Muslim groups, and two this terror trail has been brought up to pursue the agenda of Hindu nation to target the Muslim minorities. These acts, with their anti-Muslim focus are to achieve Hindu rashtra according to their plan. The author brings to fore the influence of RSS ideology in army, the role of Bhosla Military School, virtually controlled by RSS, and the role of some army officers in facilitating the acts of terror by these groups. Lt. Col Purohit, the accused in Malegaon blast, who also supplied RDX from army stores to the Hindutva terror groups, is one such officer, and he may tip of the iceberg. This has a very frightening prospect for our democracy.
The book debunks the popular perceptions which links Islam and Muslims to acts of terror and makes it clear that acts of terror are politically motivated actions with different agendas. The fascination of RSS with the fascist methods being pursued by Israel and the role of Mossad in particular is the high point of the book. Our investigation agencies need to take a cue from this and put their investigations on more professional lines.
The book takes a broad overview of Hindutva politics also and the role of media and the international connections of Hindutva politics are also presented in detail. What is missing is a time line of Hidnutva terror. Such a time line would have made it easy from the reader to see the whole picture in perspective. An Introduction by the author, putting the book in proper context and summarizing the main arguments of the book would have been a valuable addition to this otherwise most timely and revealing contribution from this journalist-activist.
This work is a serious attempt to piece together the statements of the RSS functionaries and the news items in some of the periodicals to come to the conclusions. It is a comprehensive presentation, filling the gaps in popular knowledge about the real causes of terror attacks in India. Pharos Media, the publishers need to be complemented for publishing this second book on the topic, the first one being “Who killed Karkare?” by S. M. Mushrif, which again was an eye opener. Godse’s Children, an apt name for the book, is a must for all those who seek truth in contemporary times, particularly when truth is being suppressed deliberately in pursuit of sectarian agendas. This compendium will go a long way to shape the popular opinion in a correct direction.
“Anna’s Movement Or Ramdev’s, We Never Go Anywhere Uninvited”
BJP president Nitin Gadkari on Anna Hazare, the party and the RSS.
Outlook Interviews Nitin Gadkari
Two months short of completing two years as president of the BJP, the rank outsider in national politics, Nitin Gadkari, for the first time has repositioned himself as a serious contender, also in the fray at the national level. No more satisfied just being BJP president, he will be contesting the Lok Sabha polls in 2014 from Nagpur. Gadkari’s announcement is not a one-off statement but serious RSS sanctioned politics. In his new avatar, Gadkari is not just flexing muscles but asserting himself more within the party and even setting the agenda for himself and the BJP. Here, Nitin Gadkari speaks to Prarthna Gahilote about the Anna Hazare movement, RSS and the BJP. Excerpts from the interview, a shorter version of which appeared in print:
Full Text at: http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?278789
Outlook Interviews Nitin Gadkari
Two months short of completing two years as president of the BJP, the rank outsider in national politics, Nitin Gadkari, for the first time has repositioned himself as a serious contender, also in the fray at the national level. No more satisfied just being BJP president, he will be contesting the Lok Sabha polls in 2014 from Nagpur. Gadkari’s announcement is not a one-off statement but serious RSS sanctioned politics. In his new avatar, Gadkari is not just flexing muscles but asserting himself more within the party and even setting the agenda for himself and the BJP. Here, Nitin Gadkari speaks to Prarthna Gahilote about the Anna Hazare movement, RSS and the BJP. Excerpts from the interview, a shorter version of which appeared in print:
Full Text at: http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?278789
October 28, 2011
Why the Sangh Loves Anna - Open Magazine
OPen Magazine, 22 October 2011
Why the Sangh Loves Anna
He endorses the RSS worldview while appealing to people who lie outside its fold
by Hartosh Singh Bal
It is no coincidence that the Jan Lokpal Bill imagines an ombudsman who would be to the republic what Anna is to Ralegan Siddhi, someone who will whip us all into shape
It is ironic that a movement which has made so much noise about holding a referendum on the Jan Lokpal Bill, a referendum that has no sanction or validity under the Constitution, has so much trouble with a referendum in Kashmir. Surely, whatever an individual’s stand on the issue, it is reasonable to expect that we live in a republic where such issues can be voiced and debated openly. In this context, the Bhagat Singh Kranti Sena (the very name is an insult to Bhagat Singh) is contemptible but unimportant. What is far more shocking is the amplification of the same view by Anna and his sidekick Arvind Kejriwal, who more and more reflect the same fascist bent of mind that drives the RSS.
Prashant Bhushan’s statement on Kashmir was made weeks before he was assaulted. In fact, his stand on Kashmir was clear well before the Anna movement was conceived. Why did it take an attack on Bhushan, by people who were certainly once directly allied with the Sangh and are today part of it in spirit, for Anna to suddenly attack such views in public? How has this man given to so much vagueness while replying to every pointed question suddenly found such clarity? It is only because the viewpoint that Anna and by extension Kejriwal represent is the same simplistic and ill-thought-out rightwing nationalism of the Sangh which has no space for the Constitution or the liberal values it embodies. In that sense, when Anna’s team stands and shouts “Bharat Mata Ki Jai”, it is not hailing the Indian Republic but a mythic nation that exists only in the mind. It was no coincidence that the very stage on which Anna first fasted at Jantar Mantar had a map of India shaped in the image of Bharat Mata as the backdrop. It is no coincidence that Anna is a teetotaler given to flogging young men who do not obey him. It is no coincidence that Kejriwal has often shared the stage with an anti-reservation organisation called Youth for Equality. It is no coincidence that the electioneering they are doing is not directed against corruption but the Congress (even if the distinction is sometimes hard to make, it exists). It is no coincidence that Constitutional issues are so readily dismissed by Anna and Kejriwal, who has even anointed Anna above Parliament. It is no coincidence that through the Jan Lokpal Bill, they imagine an ombudsman who would be to the republic what Anna is to Ralegan Siddhi, someone who will whip us all into shape.
Through the twentieth century, this combination—a claim to efficient governance, a mythic father or motherland, a contempt for a certain section of people—has been the mark of fascism. Surprisingly, many of the Left, such as Bhushan himself, have been slow to recognise this. The news that two members of the core committee of Anna’s team, Rajendra Singh and PV Rajagopal, have resigned is no surprise; what is a surprise is that they were part of the committee to begin with, perhaps they were taken in by the rhetoric that is always so seductive to the Left, ‘we must be with the people’. The support extended by the RSS, the overt expressions of sympathy, the covert mobilisation of numbers, the desire to make common cause with Anna, is not some public play at deception and politics, it is the manifestation of a genuine desire to make common cause with a man who has managed to fulfill their aims. Mobilise the people, corner the Congress, and fight to the death for Kashmir (only rhetorically, of course, for in reality the soldiers who die in the fighting are motivated by a far more prosaic professionalism). This only leaves the question of how long people like Medha Patkar and Prashant Bhushan will survive as part of Anna’s team. Patkar is calling for a repeal of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA). Everyone knows where Anna will stand on that one, but perhaps his views will become public only once some other organisation sympathetic to the Sangh attacks Patkar. But this is now only a matter of detail. The personal compromises that a Bhushan or a Patkar have had to make with their own views is up to them , what counts is that the attack on Bhushan has opened up the faultlines within the movement and exposed the delusions of those who joined it in the name of ‘liberal’ values.
This does not mean the movement is petering out. The Winter Session of Parliament will see a Lokpal Bill being adopted, but it is unlikely that in its details it will contain all that Anna and Kejriwal have demanded. There will be another fast, there will be more tamasha and television, but what should have been a means of channelling an anger directed against a corrupt government is now turning into a force that the RSS is only bound to welcome.
Hartosh Singh Bal turned from the difficulty of doing mathematics to the ease of writing on politics. Unlike mathematics all this requires is being less wrong than most others who dwell on the subject. He is the Political Editor of Open.
Why the Sangh Loves Anna
He endorses the RSS worldview while appealing to people who lie outside its fold
by Hartosh Singh Bal
It is no coincidence that the Jan Lokpal Bill imagines an ombudsman who would be to the republic what Anna is to Ralegan Siddhi, someone who will whip us all into shape
It is ironic that a movement which has made so much noise about holding a referendum on the Jan Lokpal Bill, a referendum that has no sanction or validity under the Constitution, has so much trouble with a referendum in Kashmir. Surely, whatever an individual’s stand on the issue, it is reasonable to expect that we live in a republic where such issues can be voiced and debated openly. In this context, the Bhagat Singh Kranti Sena (the very name is an insult to Bhagat Singh) is contemptible but unimportant. What is far more shocking is the amplification of the same view by Anna and his sidekick Arvind Kejriwal, who more and more reflect the same fascist bent of mind that drives the RSS.
Prashant Bhushan’s statement on Kashmir was made weeks before he was assaulted. In fact, his stand on Kashmir was clear well before the Anna movement was conceived. Why did it take an attack on Bhushan, by people who were certainly once directly allied with the Sangh and are today part of it in spirit, for Anna to suddenly attack such views in public? How has this man given to so much vagueness while replying to every pointed question suddenly found such clarity? It is only because the viewpoint that Anna and by extension Kejriwal represent is the same simplistic and ill-thought-out rightwing nationalism of the Sangh which has no space for the Constitution or the liberal values it embodies. In that sense, when Anna’s team stands and shouts “Bharat Mata Ki Jai”, it is not hailing the Indian Republic but a mythic nation that exists only in the mind. It was no coincidence that the very stage on which Anna first fasted at Jantar Mantar had a map of India shaped in the image of Bharat Mata as the backdrop. It is no coincidence that Anna is a teetotaler given to flogging young men who do not obey him. It is no coincidence that Kejriwal has often shared the stage with an anti-reservation organisation called Youth for Equality. It is no coincidence that the electioneering they are doing is not directed against corruption but the Congress (even if the distinction is sometimes hard to make, it exists). It is no coincidence that Constitutional issues are so readily dismissed by Anna and Kejriwal, who has even anointed Anna above Parliament. It is no coincidence that through the Jan Lokpal Bill, they imagine an ombudsman who would be to the republic what Anna is to Ralegan Siddhi, someone who will whip us all into shape.
Through the twentieth century, this combination—a claim to efficient governance, a mythic father or motherland, a contempt for a certain section of people—has been the mark of fascism. Surprisingly, many of the Left, such as Bhushan himself, have been slow to recognise this. The news that two members of the core committee of Anna’s team, Rajendra Singh and PV Rajagopal, have resigned is no surprise; what is a surprise is that they were part of the committee to begin with, perhaps they were taken in by the rhetoric that is always so seductive to the Left, ‘we must be with the people’. The support extended by the RSS, the overt expressions of sympathy, the covert mobilisation of numbers, the desire to make common cause with Anna, is not some public play at deception and politics, it is the manifestation of a genuine desire to make common cause with a man who has managed to fulfill their aims. Mobilise the people, corner the Congress, and fight to the death for Kashmir (only rhetorically, of course, for in reality the soldiers who die in the fighting are motivated by a far more prosaic professionalism). This only leaves the question of how long people like Medha Patkar and Prashant Bhushan will survive as part of Anna’s team. Patkar is calling for a repeal of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA). Everyone knows where Anna will stand on that one, but perhaps his views will become public only once some other organisation sympathetic to the Sangh attacks Patkar. But this is now only a matter of detail. The personal compromises that a Bhushan or a Patkar have had to make with their own views is up to them , what counts is that the attack on Bhushan has opened up the faultlines within the movement and exposed the delusions of those who joined it in the name of ‘liberal’ values.
This does not mean the movement is petering out. The Winter Session of Parliament will see a Lokpal Bill being adopted, but it is unlikely that in its details it will contain all that Anna and Kejriwal have demanded. There will be another fast, there will be more tamasha and television, but what should have been a means of channelling an anger directed against a corrupt government is now turning into a force that the RSS is only bound to welcome.
Hartosh Singh Bal turned from the difficulty of doing mathematics to the ease of writing on politics. Unlike mathematics all this requires is being less wrong than most others who dwell on the subject. He is the Political Editor of Open.
India-Bangladesh Border deal bugs the Hindu Right and regional chauvinists in North East India
BJP slams Dhaka land-swap deal
OUR SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT
New Delhi, Oct. 1: The BJP has rejected the Indo-Bangla land-swap deal on the grounds that it ignores the “feelings and sentiments” of the people of Assam and West Bengal.
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1111002/jsp/frontpage/story_14579266.jsp
BJP hits out at land transfer pact with Dhaka
NEW DELHI, October 2, 2011
Special Correspondent
The Bharatiya Janata Party on Saturday flayed the government for the recent Land Transfer Agreement with Bangladesh
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article2504140.ece
Bandh against 'land swapping' hits Assam | The Shillong Times
Sep 6, 2011 – Normal life was disrupted throughout Assam on Monday with the VHP, BJP and ABVP calling for a statewide bandh protesting the UPA government’s reported intention to swap land with Bangladesh during Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh’s visit to Dhaka to settle the age-old boundary dispute with Bangladesh. The VHP, BJP and ABVP have taken strong exception to the stand of Assam chief minister Tarun Gogoi who will be in the entourage of the PM along with three other chief ministers from the North East, in ‘favour’ of swapping of Assam’s land with the neighbouring country to facilitate demarcation of the border and completion of border fencing work.
http://theshillongtimes.com/2011/09/06/bandh-against-%E2%80%98land-swapping%E2%80%99-hits-assam/
AASU threatens stir if Govt cedes land to Bangla
http://www.assamtribune.com/scripts/detailsnew.asp?id=aug3011/state05
SEE ALSO:
The Times of India
Northeast student bodies stage stir in New Delhi
TNN Oct 2, 2011, 09.34AM IST
GUWAHATI: The North East Students' Organization (Neso), comprising student bodies from all the seven states of the region, on Saturday staged a dharna at Jantar Mantar in New Delhi seeking a solution to multiple issues ranging from demands for expedition of the peace processes with militant outfits to repeal of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act and protest against mega-dams being built in the region.
The students opposed the transfer of land as part of the India-Bangladesh land swap deal. The students' organizations also sought sealing of the international borders with the region to curb the ongoing influx across the borders.
Neso chairman and Aasu advisor Samujjal Bhattacharyya, who led the dharna in New Delhi, said the sit-in was staged to protest against the Centre's lackadaisical attitude towards the northeast in all respects.
Aasu general secretary Tapan Gogoi said the Neso delegation was seeking an appointment with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to submit a memorandum.
"We are strongly opposing giving away of Assam's land to Bangladesh as part of the land swap deal. The agreement is yet to be ratified by the Parliament and so we will be pressing the Prime Minister to keep the deal in abeyance. We will also be asking for his intervention in stopping the construction of mega dams in the region as suggested by experts. The government has been saying that it would like to take the opinion of other experts. We welcome this, but at the same time, the construction should be stopped till the experts carry out more studies on the issue," the Aasu general secretary said.
He added that Irom Sharmila's elder brother Irom Singhajit also joined the dharna.
Apart from Aasu, the student organizations that joined in the protest were Khasi Students Union, Garo Students' Union, All Arunachal Pradesh Students' Union, Naga Students' Federation, All Manipur Students' Union, Mizo Zirlal Pawl and Twipra Students' Federation.
OUR SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT
New Delhi, Oct. 1: The BJP has rejected the Indo-Bangla land-swap deal on the grounds that it ignores the “feelings and sentiments” of the people of Assam and West Bengal.
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1111002/jsp/frontpage/story_14579266.jsp
BJP hits out at land transfer pact with Dhaka
NEW DELHI, October 2, 2011
Special Correspondent
The Bharatiya Janata Party on Saturday flayed the government for the recent Land Transfer Agreement with Bangladesh
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article2504140.ece
Bandh against 'land swapping' hits Assam | The Shillong Times
Sep 6, 2011 – Normal life was disrupted throughout Assam on Monday with the VHP, BJP and ABVP calling for a statewide bandh protesting the UPA government’s reported intention to swap land with Bangladesh during Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh’s visit to Dhaka to settle the age-old boundary dispute with Bangladesh. The VHP, BJP and ABVP have taken strong exception to the stand of Assam chief minister Tarun Gogoi who will be in the entourage of the PM along with three other chief ministers from the North East, in ‘favour’ of swapping of Assam’s land with the neighbouring country to facilitate demarcation of the border and completion of border fencing work.
http://theshillongtimes.com/2011/09/06/bandh-against-%E2%80%98land-swapping%E2%80%99-hits-assam/
AASU threatens stir if Govt cedes land to Bangla
http://www.assamtribune.com/scripts/detailsnew.asp?id=aug3011/state05
SEE ALSO:
The Times of India
Northeast student bodies stage stir in New Delhi
TNN Oct 2, 2011, 09.34AM IST
GUWAHATI: The North East Students' Organization (Neso), comprising student bodies from all the seven states of the region, on Saturday staged a dharna at Jantar Mantar in New Delhi seeking a solution to multiple issues ranging from demands for expedition of the peace processes with militant outfits to repeal of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act and protest against mega-dams being built in the region.
The students opposed the transfer of land as part of the India-Bangladesh land swap deal. The students' organizations also sought sealing of the international borders with the region to curb the ongoing influx across the borders.
Neso chairman and Aasu advisor Samujjal Bhattacharyya, who led the dharna in New Delhi, said the sit-in was staged to protest against the Centre's lackadaisical attitude towards the northeast in all respects.
Aasu general secretary Tapan Gogoi said the Neso delegation was seeking an appointment with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to submit a memorandum.
"We are strongly opposing giving away of Assam's land to Bangladesh as part of the land swap deal. The agreement is yet to be ratified by the Parliament and so we will be pressing the Prime Minister to keep the deal in abeyance. We will also be asking for his intervention in stopping the construction of mega dams in the region as suggested by experts. The government has been saying that it would like to take the opinion of other experts. We welcome this, but at the same time, the construction should be stopped till the experts carry out more studies on the issue," the Aasu general secretary said.
He added that Irom Sharmila's elder brother Irom Singhajit also joined the dharna.
Apart from Aasu, the student organizations that joined in the protest were Khasi Students Union, Garo Students' Union, All Arunachal Pradesh Students' Union, Naga Students' Federation, All Manipur Students' Union, Mizo Zirlal Pawl and Twipra Students' Federation.
Orissa town painted saffron ahead of Advani Yatra
IBNLive.com - Oct 22, 2011
Town painted saffron ahead of Advani Yatra
BARGARH/SAMBALPUR: With hours to go before senior BJP leader LK Advani arrives in the district as part of his Jana Chetna Yatra, BJP is on the overdrive to whip up a frenzy. The entire stretch from Luharachati border to Sambalpur town has been painted saffron with BJP symbols, flags and banners.
http://ibnlive.in.com/news/town-painted-saffron-ahead-of--advani-yatra/195679-60-117.html
Town painted saffron ahead of Advani Yatra
BARGARH/SAMBALPUR: With hours to go before senior BJP leader LK Advani arrives in the district as part of his Jana Chetna Yatra, BJP is on the overdrive to whip up a frenzy. The entire stretch from Luharachati border to Sambalpur town has been painted saffron with BJP symbols, flags and banners.
http://ibnlive.in.com/news/town-painted-saffron-ahead-of--advani-yatra/195679-60-117.html
The richness of the Ramayana, the poverty of a University: Interview with Romila Thapar
The Hindu, 28 October 2011
The controversial decision earlier this month by the Academic Council of Delhi University to drop A.K. Ramanujan's celebrated essay on the Ramayana, Three Hundred Ramayanas: Five Examples and Three Thoughts on Translations from the B.A. History (Honours) course has evoked sharp protests from several historians and other scholars.
Coming three years after the Hindutva student body, the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP), vandalised DU's History department to protest against the teaching of this essay, the decision has been criticised as a surrender of academic freedom in the face of political pressure.
Romila Thapar, the foremost authority on early Indian history, spoke to Priscilla Jebaraj about the decision, its adverse consequences for scholarship and knowledge, and the efforts by vested interests to project one version of Hindu cultural heritage and religious tradition over all others.
Read the interview here
The controversial decision earlier this month by the Academic Council of Delhi University to drop A.K. Ramanujan's celebrated essay on the Ramayana, Three Hundred Ramayanas: Five Examples and Three Thoughts on Translations from the B.A. History (Honours) course has evoked sharp protests from several historians and other scholars.
Coming three years after the Hindutva student body, the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP), vandalised DU's History department to protest against the teaching of this essay, the decision has been criticised as a surrender of academic freedom in the face of political pressure.
Romila Thapar, the foremost authority on early Indian history, spoke to Priscilla Jebaraj about the decision, its adverse consequences for scholarship and knowledge, and the efforts by vested interests to project one version of Hindu cultural heritage and religious tradition over all others.
Read the interview here
October 27, 2011
On Religious Leaders in Indian Politics
From: The Times of India
Path to politics
ARATI R JERATH, TNN Oct 23, 2011, 05.30AM IST
The year was 1952 and independent India's first general elections were in full swing. Only one person dared to challenge the country's first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, in the latter's family bastion of Phulpur in UP's Allahabad district. His name was Swami Prabhudutt Brahmachari. He contested as an independent supported by ultra conservative Hindu groups like Swami Karpatri's Akhil Bharatiya Ram Rajya Parishad and the All India Hindu Mahasabha. They had joined hands on one common platform: all were virulently opposed to Nehru's Hindu Code Bill which sought to make sweeping reforms in inheritance, property and marriage laws for Hindus.
It was an amazing campaign, recorded in great detail by the January 28, 1952 issue of Time magazine. Describing the swami as one "who wears a luxuriant grey beard, orange-and-red-rimmed spectacles, a saffron robe and a long white loincloth" , the article states, "Holy Man Brahmachari toured Nehru's constituency in a 1931 Dodge sedan accompanied by a troupe of Hindu singers. To the chanting of Hindu psalms, he danced on the platform, rhythmically tapping a pair of small brass cymbals. A disciple read from a pamphlet he had written." The article quotes from one such pamphlet: "The Hindu Code Bill will ruin religion, confuse castes, split every family, pit brothers against sisters and profit only lawyers."
Needless to say, Nehru trounced Prabhudutt Brahmachari to win by a huge margin. The swami , who had taken a vow of silence and therefore resorted to writing what he wanted to say, justified his decision to jump into the electoral fray. "If today I participate in an election, it's only because my innermost voice bids me to do so," he wrote with his Sheaffer fountain pen.
Long before Ramdev and Sri Sri Ravi Shankar burst on the scene, several swamis, gurus and sants had flirted with politics and bit the dust. Prabhudutt Brahmachari faded away after his ignominious defeat while Swami Kerpatri's RRP merged itself into the BJP's previous avatar, the Bharatiya Jana Sangh, having failed to make a mark in successive polls.
After them came Swami Dhirendra Brahmachari who inveigled his way into Indira Gandhi's inner circle through his mastery over yoga and became a powerful figure in her time. Although he stayed away from formal politics, he exercised tremendous influence over government postings and cabinet appointments and was often commandeered by Indira Gandhi for backroom political dealings. A Congress oldtimer recalls that senior party leaders and ministerial aspirants used to line up at his residence seeking favours or simply an audience. His proximity to power helped him accumulate a vast collection of ashrams, riches and even a gun factory in Jammu. His decline began with Indira Gandhi's defeat after the Emergency and the last years of his life went in fighting dozens of criminal cases and trying to fend off government acquisition of his properties. He was killed when his private plane crashed while he was flying to one of his ashrams.
The next decade saw the rise of Chandraswami who boasted among his followers two prime ministers, P V Narasimha Rao and Chandrashekhar. Like Dhirendra Brahmachari, Chandraswami did not join politics formally but was a power to reckon with during Rao's tenure as PM. He meddled in Congress politics as Rao's interlocutor and in affairs of state as a close associate of controversial international arms dealer Adnan Khashoggi. He too built up a massive empire using his political clout but fell hard with Rao's exit from government. For years, he was neck-deep in criminal and tax cases and even did a stint in Tihar jail.
It was the BJP which, under the influence of the RSS at the height of the Ram mandir movement, encouraged religious leaders to participate in active politics and sent 10 of them to the Lok Sabha in the 1991 elections. Prominent among them were Mahant Avaidyanath, Swami Chinmayanand , Swami Vishvanath Shastri and Sadhvi Uma Bharati. Of them, Avaidyanath is the only one who remains relevant because of the Gorakhpur Mutt's traditional association with politics. He has passed on his political mantle to son Adityanath, currently the BJP MP from Gorakhpur. The rest were sidelined ruthlessly once the BJP got off the mandir tiger and turned its attention to bread-and-butter issues. Others who dabbled in politics through the RSS-BJP were not so lucky. Asaram Bapu, who once campaigned for the party in Gujarat, is facing trial for attempted murder. The shankaracharya of the Kanchi Peeth, Jayendra Saraswathi, believed to have wielded influence with AIADMK chief Jayalalithaa through a section of the RSS, was arrested on a murder conspiracy charge.
Path to politics
ARATI R JERATH, TNN Oct 23, 2011, 05.30AM IST
The year was 1952 and independent India's first general elections were in full swing. Only one person dared to challenge the country's first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, in the latter's family bastion of Phulpur in UP's Allahabad district. His name was Swami Prabhudutt Brahmachari. He contested as an independent supported by ultra conservative Hindu groups like Swami Karpatri's Akhil Bharatiya Ram Rajya Parishad and the All India Hindu Mahasabha. They had joined hands on one common platform: all were virulently opposed to Nehru's Hindu Code Bill which sought to make sweeping reforms in inheritance, property and marriage laws for Hindus.
It was an amazing campaign, recorded in great detail by the January 28, 1952 issue of Time magazine. Describing the swami as one "who wears a luxuriant grey beard, orange-and-red-rimmed spectacles, a saffron robe and a long white loincloth" , the article states, "Holy Man Brahmachari toured Nehru's constituency in a 1931 Dodge sedan accompanied by a troupe of Hindu singers. To the chanting of Hindu psalms, he danced on the platform, rhythmically tapping a pair of small brass cymbals. A disciple read from a pamphlet he had written." The article quotes from one such pamphlet: "The Hindu Code Bill will ruin religion, confuse castes, split every family, pit brothers against sisters and profit only lawyers."
Needless to say, Nehru trounced Prabhudutt Brahmachari to win by a huge margin. The swami , who had taken a vow of silence and therefore resorted to writing what he wanted to say, justified his decision to jump into the electoral fray. "If today I participate in an election, it's only because my innermost voice bids me to do so," he wrote with his Sheaffer fountain pen.
Long before Ramdev and Sri Sri Ravi Shankar burst on the scene, several swamis, gurus and sants had flirted with politics and bit the dust. Prabhudutt Brahmachari faded away after his ignominious defeat while Swami Kerpatri's RRP merged itself into the BJP's previous avatar, the Bharatiya Jana Sangh, having failed to make a mark in successive polls.
After them came Swami Dhirendra Brahmachari who inveigled his way into Indira Gandhi's inner circle through his mastery over yoga and became a powerful figure in her time. Although he stayed away from formal politics, he exercised tremendous influence over government postings and cabinet appointments and was often commandeered by Indira Gandhi for backroom political dealings. A Congress oldtimer recalls that senior party leaders and ministerial aspirants used to line up at his residence seeking favours or simply an audience. His proximity to power helped him accumulate a vast collection of ashrams, riches and even a gun factory in Jammu. His decline began with Indira Gandhi's defeat after the Emergency and the last years of his life went in fighting dozens of criminal cases and trying to fend off government acquisition of his properties. He was killed when his private plane crashed while he was flying to one of his ashrams.
The next decade saw the rise of Chandraswami who boasted among his followers two prime ministers, P V Narasimha Rao and Chandrashekhar. Like Dhirendra Brahmachari, Chandraswami did not join politics formally but was a power to reckon with during Rao's tenure as PM. He meddled in Congress politics as Rao's interlocutor and in affairs of state as a close associate of controversial international arms dealer Adnan Khashoggi. He too built up a massive empire using his political clout but fell hard with Rao's exit from government. For years, he was neck-deep in criminal and tax cases and even did a stint in Tihar jail.
It was the BJP which, under the influence of the RSS at the height of the Ram mandir movement, encouraged religious leaders to participate in active politics and sent 10 of them to the Lok Sabha in the 1991 elections. Prominent among them were Mahant Avaidyanath, Swami Chinmayanand , Swami Vishvanath Shastri and Sadhvi Uma Bharati. Of them, Avaidyanath is the only one who remains relevant because of the Gorakhpur Mutt's traditional association with politics. He has passed on his political mantle to son Adityanath, currently the BJP MP from Gorakhpur. The rest were sidelined ruthlessly once the BJP got off the mandir tiger and turned its attention to bread-and-butter issues. Others who dabbled in politics through the RSS-BJP were not so lucky. Asaram Bapu, who once campaigned for the party in Gujarat, is facing trial for attempted murder. The shankaracharya of the Kanchi Peeth, Jayendra Saraswathi, believed to have wielded influence with AIADMK chief Jayalalithaa through a section of the RSS, was arrested on a murder conspiracy charge.
Thanks to BJP led municipal corporation, some 100 roads to be named after Hindutva leaders
From: Indian Express
MCD to name roads after Parivar icons, BJP leaders
Posted: Tue Oct 11 2011, 02:58 hrs New Delhi:
Ahead of next year’s municipal elections, the BJP-led Municipal Corporation of Delhi has decided to leave its mark, all set in concrete. The civic agency is in the process of naming 100 roads, streets and parks, a majority after the names of RSS and BJP stalwarts.
The only Congress representation in the list is Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru — a park in B-1 Block of Madangir is being named after him.
Of the RSS bigwigs, its founder K B Hedgewar finds maximum mention. The MCD has decided to name the IP Extension-Shivpuri intersection, the entrance (swagat dwar) on Sudesh Marg in Rajouri Garden, and a park in New Seelampur after the Sangh Parivar icon.
A park in Subhash Nagar and an MCD canteen in Rohini Sector-3 will be named after Veer Savarkar while the road connecting Rohini and Samaypur Badli will be dedicated to Deen Dayal Upadhyay.
BJP leaders who have found their way in the list include former Delhi Chief Minister Sahib Singh Verma (road in Rajiv Nagar), former MLA Puran Chand Yogi (main gate of Inderpuri and road leading from the gate) and former Delhi BJP chief Mukund Lal Katyal (a park in Tagore Garden).
Over two dozen roads, streets and parks in the city have also been named after gods and saints.
Congress leaders in MCD said the road naming spree was only an attempt to saffronise the national capital. “City roads and parks should be named after local social workers, landmarks and national leaders who have contributed to the development of the nation. This is nothing but a cheap attempt at gaining political mileage out of a social cause,” said Jai Kishan Sharma, Leader of Opposition in MCD.
But the BJP brushed aside the allegations. “We have several leaders who have not received their deserved share of recognition at the national stage. We have been approached by councillors to suggest names of streets and parks. Unlike the Congress, we do have an option of calling on the contribution of people other than those confined to the Nehru-Gandhi family,” said Mayor Rajni Abbi, who is also Chairperson of the Naming and Renaming Committee.
MCD to name roads after Parivar icons, BJP leaders
Posted: Tue Oct 11 2011, 02:58 hrs New Delhi:
Ahead of next year’s municipal elections, the BJP-led Municipal Corporation of Delhi has decided to leave its mark, all set in concrete. The civic agency is in the process of naming 100 roads, streets and parks, a majority after the names of RSS and BJP stalwarts.
The only Congress representation in the list is Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru — a park in B-1 Block of Madangir is being named after him.
Of the RSS bigwigs, its founder K B Hedgewar finds maximum mention. The MCD has decided to name the IP Extension-Shivpuri intersection, the entrance (swagat dwar) on Sudesh Marg in Rajouri Garden, and a park in New Seelampur after the Sangh Parivar icon.
A park in Subhash Nagar and an MCD canteen in Rohini Sector-3 will be named after Veer Savarkar while the road connecting Rohini and Samaypur Badli will be dedicated to Deen Dayal Upadhyay.
BJP leaders who have found their way in the list include former Delhi Chief Minister Sahib Singh Verma (road in Rajiv Nagar), former MLA Puran Chand Yogi (main gate of Inderpuri and road leading from the gate) and former Delhi BJP chief Mukund Lal Katyal (a park in Tagore Garden).
Over two dozen roads, streets and parks in the city have also been named after gods and saints.
Congress leaders in MCD said the road naming spree was only an attempt to saffronise the national capital. “City roads and parks should be named after local social workers, landmarks and national leaders who have contributed to the development of the nation. This is nothing but a cheap attempt at gaining political mileage out of a social cause,” said Jai Kishan Sharma, Leader of Opposition in MCD.
But the BJP brushed aside the allegations. “We have several leaders who have not received their deserved share of recognition at the national stage. We have been approached by councillors to suggest names of streets and parks. Unlike the Congress, we do have an option of calling on the contribution of people other than those confined to the Nehru-Gandhi family,” said Mayor Rajni Abbi, who is also Chairperson of the Naming and Renaming Committee.
Coming soon an independent survey on the condition of Muslims in West Bengal
From: Indian Express
Civil society group begins own survey on Muslims’ condition
Express News Service
Posted: Mon Oct 24 2011, 06:40 hrs Kolkata:
Members of civil society and few academician are all set to conduct a survey on the condition of Muslims in West Bengal. They say that have been forced to take up the study all by themselves.
The survey titled “Public Report on the Socio-economic Status of Muslims of West Bengal” comes five years after the Sachar Committee findings that stated the condition of Muslims was not very good in the state.
Read More
Civil society group begins own survey on Muslims’ condition
Express News Service
Posted: Mon Oct 24 2011, 06:40 hrs Kolkata:
Members of civil society and few academician are all set to conduct a survey on the condition of Muslims in West Bengal. They say that have been forced to take up the study all by themselves.
The survey titled “Public Report on the Socio-economic Status of Muslims of West Bengal” comes five years after the Sachar Committee findings that stated the condition of Muslims was not very good in the state.
Read More
The Kuki - Naga ethnic chauvinists and the dangerous Manipur blockade
Imphal Free Press | October 22, 2011
Blockades of Many Kinds
By B.G. Verghese
The Manipur blockade has gone far beyond a demonstrative measure and must be ended. The ordinary people have suffered enough. The Kuki-Naga quarrel at the root of the agitation is esoteric for most and politically whipped up by ethnic chauvinists on both sides. The State government is caught in a bind while Centre appears to have been passive for far too long, hoping that the problem will go away by itself. A prolonged stalemate could erupt in anger.
The Kukis claim that they have been neglected by the administration and oppressed by the Nagas. They demand the partitioning of the Kangpoki sub-division of the Naga majority Senapati district to form a Kuki-dominated Sadr Hills district in which their development and cultural prospects will be brighter. The United Naga Council that straddles Manipur and Nagaland sees in this a dark plot further to divide the Naga homeland and frustrate the goal of a united Nagalim.
In order to force the issue in their favour, the Kukis have blockaded both the Dimapur-Kohima-Imphal and Silchar-Jiribam-Imphal national highways, only to find themselves trumped by the Nagas who control the upper sectors of both roads connecting Manipur with Assam and the Indian heartland. Trucks have been burnt and movements forcibly stopped victimising people on both sides but especially those living in the Imphal Valley and further south. Prices of fuel, daily necessities and medicines have sky-rocketed. The blockade has been on for nearly 90 days, leading to distress, helplessness and despair.
Whatever the State Government and the Centre have done has been of little avail. Some essential supplies have been air-lifted but this has been no more than a minor palliative. The issue, obviously tricky, is clearly political. It is time for the Centre to demand opening of both roads for movement of essential supplies within 48 hours, with talks to follow to resolve the issues in contention, failing which it must be prepared to use the military to open up both routes. Some will argue that such a move may spark violence. The answer is that violence is being and has been used for three months to strangulate an entire people. The status quo is unacceptable.
A whiff of firmness after a display of extraordinary patience (or inaction), coupled with mediatory and practical efforts to restore harmony, will pay dividends. If governance fails, everything fails and things could spiral out of hand. A parallel initiative would be to negotiate emergency supplies for Manipur from and through Myanmar and Bangladesh, via Chittagong. The current crisis underlines the urgency of improving connectivity to and from Manipur (and in and to the Northeast generally), especially by improving the Silchar-Jiribam-Imphal highway. This route will in any case have to be realigned to overcome submergence should the Tipaimukh hydroelectric project move forward as it should.
The long term answer would seem to lie in pushing forward with the Naga peace talks and commencing a similar dialogue with the Kukis and other groups in a bid to understand and allay their fears and misgivings as ethnic entities. In the interim, the Sadar Hills Kukis could be granted a non-territorial council with appropriate institutional arrangements to ensure their development and cultural advancement even as the Naga majority areas within Manipur are granted similar autonomy within a non-territorial Nagalim. This would safeguard their interests without dismembering Manipur, Arunachal or Assam on each of which the Naga underground have territorial claims that can only be made good by consent, which has thus far proven totally elusive, or by the kind of pragmatic settlement suggested here or any other better idea. The Church is a powerful and positive influence and should be brought into the dialogue more directly to arrive at a just and honourable settlement.
Delicate negotiations such as are in progress between the NSCN-IM leadership and the Centre cannot be forced. Yet, dilatoriness could also bring in train its own problems as the current situation is clearly far from ideal. The Naga underground virtually runs a parallel administration through parallel taxation (or extortion), though everybody winks at ground realities.
Talks with the Metei underground would also be in order as Meitei nationalists have their own historical grievances going back to the alleged manner in which Manipur’s merger was effected and the status accorded to this ancient kingdom and its cultural symbols. An agreed form of words to express regret for any inadvertent hurt o misunderstanding caused in the past is surely worth exploring as a path to reconciliation.
Talks with ULFA are on and there are many other ethnic groups that nurse real or imagined grievances. These should all be addressed and the message should go out that none will go unheard and no legitimate and reasonable accommodation will be denied. The past is behind us and its perceived wrongs can only be redeemed by building a better future together, within an Indian commonwealth of equal peoples.
Telengana has been on the boil too and here again the Centre must act swiftly to avert a dangerous breach in national cohesion. The problem is that the Congress has blown hot and cold on any further state formation and has once again addressed the problem only on calculations of short term electoral and political gain. Half a dozen demands for new states are on the anvil and more will be broached. On what criteria of economic viability, administrative convenience, natural resource optimisation, security and cultural factors should a determination be made? There is a case for many more, smaller states. How many may be too many? And if something is conceded would it opens a veritable Pandora’s Box as some fear?
These questions are best answered by a blue riband commission of men and women of wisdom and experience who have no axe to grind. Let them take stock and see what countervailing institutions or arrangements might be put in place like the old Zonal Councils (that have been all but wound up), river basin authorities, natural resource regions, transport corridors and geo-strategic or common security regions, special urban government mechanisms and more empowered panchayati raj bodies. The commission should be set up in consultation with all major parties and the States and its report submitted after the next general election.
Mamta Bannerjee’s offer of talks with Bengal’s Maoists and the Home Minister’s repeated clarification that the latter need not surrender their arms but only not use them or resort to other forms of violence, intimidation and regrouping while the dialogue is on should not be allowed to wither on the vine. Extension of the Fifth Schedule to states currently not covered by it and its honest implementation alongside the Supreme Court’s Samata judgement regarding development and corporate social responsibility point to the direction in which the country must travel to promote growth with equity and local participation.
www.bgverghese .com
Blockades of Many Kinds
By B.G. Verghese
The Manipur blockade has gone far beyond a demonstrative measure and must be ended. The ordinary people have suffered enough. The Kuki-Naga quarrel at the root of the agitation is esoteric for most and politically whipped up by ethnic chauvinists on both sides. The State government is caught in a bind while Centre appears to have been passive for far too long, hoping that the problem will go away by itself. A prolonged stalemate could erupt in anger.
The Kukis claim that they have been neglected by the administration and oppressed by the Nagas. They demand the partitioning of the Kangpoki sub-division of the Naga majority Senapati district to form a Kuki-dominated Sadr Hills district in which their development and cultural prospects will be brighter. The United Naga Council that straddles Manipur and Nagaland sees in this a dark plot further to divide the Naga homeland and frustrate the goal of a united Nagalim.
In order to force the issue in their favour, the Kukis have blockaded both the Dimapur-Kohima-Imphal and Silchar-Jiribam-Imphal national highways, only to find themselves trumped by the Nagas who control the upper sectors of both roads connecting Manipur with Assam and the Indian heartland. Trucks have been burnt and movements forcibly stopped victimising people on both sides but especially those living in the Imphal Valley and further south. Prices of fuel, daily necessities and medicines have sky-rocketed. The blockade has been on for nearly 90 days, leading to distress, helplessness and despair.
Whatever the State Government and the Centre have done has been of little avail. Some essential supplies have been air-lifted but this has been no more than a minor palliative. The issue, obviously tricky, is clearly political. It is time for the Centre to demand opening of both roads for movement of essential supplies within 48 hours, with talks to follow to resolve the issues in contention, failing which it must be prepared to use the military to open up both routes. Some will argue that such a move may spark violence. The answer is that violence is being and has been used for three months to strangulate an entire people. The status quo is unacceptable.
A whiff of firmness after a display of extraordinary patience (or inaction), coupled with mediatory and practical efforts to restore harmony, will pay dividends. If governance fails, everything fails and things could spiral out of hand. A parallel initiative would be to negotiate emergency supplies for Manipur from and through Myanmar and Bangladesh, via Chittagong. The current crisis underlines the urgency of improving connectivity to and from Manipur (and in and to the Northeast generally), especially by improving the Silchar-Jiribam-Imphal highway. This route will in any case have to be realigned to overcome submergence should the Tipaimukh hydroelectric project move forward as it should.
The long term answer would seem to lie in pushing forward with the Naga peace talks and commencing a similar dialogue with the Kukis and other groups in a bid to understand and allay their fears and misgivings as ethnic entities. In the interim, the Sadar Hills Kukis could be granted a non-territorial council with appropriate institutional arrangements to ensure their development and cultural advancement even as the Naga majority areas within Manipur are granted similar autonomy within a non-territorial Nagalim. This would safeguard their interests without dismembering Manipur, Arunachal or Assam on each of which the Naga underground have territorial claims that can only be made good by consent, which has thus far proven totally elusive, or by the kind of pragmatic settlement suggested here or any other better idea. The Church is a powerful and positive influence and should be brought into the dialogue more directly to arrive at a just and honourable settlement.
Delicate negotiations such as are in progress between the NSCN-IM leadership and the Centre cannot be forced. Yet, dilatoriness could also bring in train its own problems as the current situation is clearly far from ideal. The Naga underground virtually runs a parallel administration through parallel taxation (or extortion), though everybody winks at ground realities.
Talks with the Metei underground would also be in order as Meitei nationalists have their own historical grievances going back to the alleged manner in which Manipur’s merger was effected and the status accorded to this ancient kingdom and its cultural symbols. An agreed form of words to express regret for any inadvertent hurt o misunderstanding caused in the past is surely worth exploring as a path to reconciliation.
Talks with ULFA are on and there are many other ethnic groups that nurse real or imagined grievances. These should all be addressed and the message should go out that none will go unheard and no legitimate and reasonable accommodation will be denied. The past is behind us and its perceived wrongs can only be redeemed by building a better future together, within an Indian commonwealth of equal peoples.
Telengana has been on the boil too and here again the Centre must act swiftly to avert a dangerous breach in national cohesion. The problem is that the Congress has blown hot and cold on any further state formation and has once again addressed the problem only on calculations of short term electoral and political gain. Half a dozen demands for new states are on the anvil and more will be broached. On what criteria of economic viability, administrative convenience, natural resource optimisation, security and cultural factors should a determination be made? There is a case for many more, smaller states. How many may be too many? And if something is conceded would it opens a veritable Pandora’s Box as some fear?
These questions are best answered by a blue riband commission of men and women of wisdom and experience who have no axe to grind. Let them take stock and see what countervailing institutions or arrangements might be put in place like the old Zonal Councils (that have been all but wound up), river basin authorities, natural resource regions, transport corridors and geo-strategic or common security regions, special urban government mechanisms and more empowered panchayati raj bodies. The commission should be set up in consultation with all major parties and the States and its report submitted after the next general election.
Mamta Bannerjee’s offer of talks with Bengal’s Maoists and the Home Minister’s repeated clarification that the latter need not surrender their arms but only not use them or resort to other forms of violence, intimidation and regrouping while the dialogue is on should not be allowed to wither on the vine. Extension of the Fifth Schedule to states currently not covered by it and its honest implementation alongside the Supreme Court’s Samata judgement regarding development and corporate social responsibility point to the direction in which the country must travel to promote growth with equity and local participation.
www.bgverghese .com
Delhi University and the purging of Ramanujan
From: The Telegraph - 27 October 2011
Three hundred Ramayanas
- Delhi University and the purging of Ramanujan
by Mukul Kesavan
When I studied history as an undergraduate in Delhi University in the mid-1970s, A.K. Ramanujan’s essay, “Three Hundred Ramayanas”, hadn’t been written and therefore couldn’t be read. The current vice-chancellor of Delhi University, on whose watch this essay has been purged from the university’s syllabus, was a student of mathematics in the same college at the time, a contemporary of men like the writer and member of parliament, Shashi Tharoor, the writer and publisher, Rukun Advani, and the broadcaster and civil servant, Ramu Damodaran.
I mention these seemingly irrelevant details because I’ve been trying to work out why the vice-chancellor and the academic council of Delhi University chose to delete Ramanujan’s essay from the BA history course. The essay is a marvellous account of the hundreds of ways in which the Ramayana has been told, complete with examples of this narrative diversity. I can’t imagine that the vice-chancellor, a member of that urbane cohort, the Class of ’75, wanted the essay removed because he agreed with the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad goons who first agitated on the issue three years ago. They did this by trashing the department of history and physically assaulting the head of the department. This happened during the tenure of the previous vice-chancellor, but no holder of this office could possibly wish to further the work of thugs who seek to violently limit the intellectual freedom of a university. So that couldn’t be the reason.
Nor could it be expert opinion. The expert committee appointed by the Supreme Court to investigate the matter had four members, three of whom endorsed Ramanujan’s essay without reservation. The fourth, while praising the essay’s scholarship, came to the conclusion that it would be difficult for college lecturers to teach with sufficient context, especially those who weren’t Hindu.
Now, one of the assumptions behind the idea of a university education is that people learn about things they didn’t know before. Then, if they so choose, they become teachers themselves and pass that knowledge on to others. If our fitness to teach a subject was predicated on the cultural context into which we were born, we wouldn’t have universities as we know them today. I teach history at Jamia Millia Islamia. For years, I taught a course called ‘The History of Islam in India’. My department had many distinguished historians who happened to be Muslim, but not one of them was crass enough to suggest that my being non-Muslim rendered me unfit to teach that course.
[. . .]
In case anyone has missed the point, the essay in question is not a pamphlet written by a provocateur: it is a scholarly essay published by a university press and aimed principally at an academic readership. Which makes it even harder to understand why the highest academic body of India’s most important liberal arts university, the University of Delhi, would choose to override expert opinion and remove it from an undergraduate syllabus. Especially when doing so would suggest, whether the academic council intended this or not, that the university had caved in to violent intimidation.
[ . . .]
The reason Hindutva militants attacked this essay is not difficult to understand. Hindutva seeks to re-make the diversity of Hindu narratives and practices into a uniform faith based on standardized texts. When Ramanujan tells, in scrupulous translation, Valmiki’s version of Ahalya’s unfaithfulness, where Indra is emasculated by the sage Gautama for cuckolding him, the Hindutva right is embarrassed and appalled because it likes its epics sanitized.
If the members of the academic council and the vice-chancellor are appalled by the Ahalya story, they should know that their objection is to Valmiki’s Ramayana, not Ramanujan’s essay. They should also reflect on the implications of a decision that suggests that the academic guardians of the University of Delhi believe that their Honours students shouldn’t be introduced to an unexpurgated version of Valmiki’s Ramayana, that even references to the original of this epic text, should be bowdlerized or purged on the surreal ground that they distort the “…traditions of Hindu Culture…”
[. . .]
I can only imagine that the vice-chancellor and the academic council made an honest mistake, that, prompted by a misplaced sense of prudence or superabundant caution, they offered “Three Hundred Ramayanas” at the altar of a lumpen god, hoping to appease it. It won’t, of course: this god is insatiable. Instead of pandering to unreason, the university should be true to itself, stand its ground and reinstate Ramanujan.
FULL TEXT HERE
Three hundred Ramayanas
- Delhi University and the purging of Ramanujan
by Mukul Kesavan
When I studied history as an undergraduate in Delhi University in the mid-1970s, A.K. Ramanujan’s essay, “Three Hundred Ramayanas”, hadn’t been written and therefore couldn’t be read. The current vice-chancellor of Delhi University, on whose watch this essay has been purged from the university’s syllabus, was a student of mathematics in the same college at the time, a contemporary of men like the writer and member of parliament, Shashi Tharoor, the writer and publisher, Rukun Advani, and the broadcaster and civil servant, Ramu Damodaran.
I mention these seemingly irrelevant details because I’ve been trying to work out why the vice-chancellor and the academic council of Delhi University chose to delete Ramanujan’s essay from the BA history course. The essay is a marvellous account of the hundreds of ways in which the Ramayana has been told, complete with examples of this narrative diversity. I can’t imagine that the vice-chancellor, a member of that urbane cohort, the Class of ’75, wanted the essay removed because he agreed with the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad goons who first agitated on the issue three years ago. They did this by trashing the department of history and physically assaulting the head of the department. This happened during the tenure of the previous vice-chancellor, but no holder of this office could possibly wish to further the work of thugs who seek to violently limit the intellectual freedom of a university. So that couldn’t be the reason.
Nor could it be expert opinion. The expert committee appointed by the Supreme Court to investigate the matter had four members, three of whom endorsed Ramanujan’s essay without reservation. The fourth, while praising the essay’s scholarship, came to the conclusion that it would be difficult for college lecturers to teach with sufficient context, especially those who weren’t Hindu.
Now, one of the assumptions behind the idea of a university education is that people learn about things they didn’t know before. Then, if they so choose, they become teachers themselves and pass that knowledge on to others. If our fitness to teach a subject was predicated on the cultural context into which we were born, we wouldn’t have universities as we know them today. I teach history at Jamia Millia Islamia. For years, I taught a course called ‘The History of Islam in India’. My department had many distinguished historians who happened to be Muslim, but not one of them was crass enough to suggest that my being non-Muslim rendered me unfit to teach that course.
[. . .]
In case anyone has missed the point, the essay in question is not a pamphlet written by a provocateur: it is a scholarly essay published by a university press and aimed principally at an academic readership. Which makes it even harder to understand why the highest academic body of India’s most important liberal arts university, the University of Delhi, would choose to override expert opinion and remove it from an undergraduate syllabus. Especially when doing so would suggest, whether the academic council intended this or not, that the university had caved in to violent intimidation.
[ . . .]
The reason Hindutva militants attacked this essay is not difficult to understand. Hindutva seeks to re-make the diversity of Hindu narratives and practices into a uniform faith based on standardized texts. When Ramanujan tells, in scrupulous translation, Valmiki’s version of Ahalya’s unfaithfulness, where Indra is emasculated by the sage Gautama for cuckolding him, the Hindutva right is embarrassed and appalled because it likes its epics sanitized.
If the members of the academic council and the vice-chancellor are appalled by the Ahalya story, they should know that their objection is to Valmiki’s Ramayana, not Ramanujan’s essay. They should also reflect on the implications of a decision that suggests that the academic guardians of the University of Delhi believe that their Honours students shouldn’t be introduced to an unexpurgated version of Valmiki’s Ramayana, that even references to the original of this epic text, should be bowdlerized or purged on the surreal ground that they distort the “…traditions of Hindu Culture…”
[. . .]
I can only imagine that the vice-chancellor and the academic council made an honest mistake, that, prompted by a misplaced sense of prudence or superabundant caution, they offered “Three Hundred Ramayanas” at the altar of a lumpen god, hoping to appease it. It won’t, of course: this god is insatiable. Instead of pandering to unreason, the university should be true to itself, stand its ground and reinstate Ramanujan.
FULL TEXT HERE
Hindutva campaign continues against communal violence bill
The Hindu
CHENNAI, October 24, 2011 
CHENNAI, October 24, 2011
Communal violence Bill 'not needed'
(From left) Joginder Singh, former CBI Director, K.T. Thomas, retired judge, Supreme Court and S. Gurumurthy, vice-president, Dharma Raksha Samiti, at a seminar in Chennai on Sunday. Photo: S.R. Raghunathan
http://www.thehindu.com/news/states/tamil-nadu/article2565754.ece
o o o
No need for Communal Violence Bill, says RSS
Economic Times - Oct 15, 2011
GORAKHPUR: Questioning the locus stand of Sonia Gandhi-led National Advisory Council in drafting the proposed Communal Violence Bill, the RSS on Saturday
http://tinyurl.com/62cxk9e
http://www.thehindu.com/news/states/tamil-nadu/article2565754.ece
o o o
No need for Communal Violence Bill, says RSS
Economic Times - Oct 15, 2011
GORAKHPUR: Questioning the locus stand of Sonia Gandhi-led National Advisory Council in drafting the proposed Communal Violence Bill, the RSS on Saturday
http://tinyurl.com/62cxk9e
October 26, 2011
India and Israel: a friendship deepened by prejudice
From The Guardian
An alliance against Islamic extremism must not become an excuse for far-right parties to fan anti-Muslim sentiment
[by] Kapil Komireddi
(guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 25 October 2011)
Babri mosque
Hindu extremists' struggle to seize the Babri mosque in northern India looks to Israel's appropriation of Palestinian land as a template. Photograph: Douglas E Curran/AFP/Getty Images
In 1974, the New York Times journalist Bernard Weinraub described India as "the loneliest post in the world" for Israeli diplomats. Having voted against the creation of Israel at the UN in 1947, India held back from establishing full diplomatic relations with Tel Aviv until 1992. For decades, Israel's presence in India was limited to an immigration office in Mumbai. In between, India voted with the majority to pass UN resolution 3379, condemning Zionism as a form of racism, became one of the first non-Arab states to recognise Palestine's declaration of independence in 1988, and was generally among the more vocal non-Arab voices against Israel.
Today, India is Israel's closest eastern ally and its largest arms market. Annual non-military bilateral trade alone exceeds $4.5bn. Since 2001, the diasporas of the two countries have emerged as energetic allies against a shared enemy: Islamic extremism. A survey by the Israeli foreign ministry in 2009 found India to be the most pro-Israel country in the world, well above the US. Once a bastion of pro-Palestinian sentiment, India recently appeared at the bottom in a worldwide poll of countries sympathetic to Palestinian statehood. Throw a stone in Panaji and it is likely to land on an Israeli backpacking through India after his post-mandatory service.
What precipitated this dramatic shift? Israel had all along been a quiet ally of New Delhi, volunteering clandestine support as India sought to repel attacks by China (in 1962) and Pakistan (in 1965). Israeli officials knew also that India, which had no history of anti-semitism, had arrived at its Israel policy through a combination of post-colonial hauteur, realpolitik – particularly its desire to placate Arab opinion in its contest against Islamic Pakistan – and an ethical commitment to the Palestinian cause. Partly for these reasons, India's anti-Israel actions rarely provoked any anxiety in Tel Aviv.
There are three principal reasons behind the shift in India's attitude. The first is the belated realisation that no amount of deference to Arab sentiment could alter Muslim opinion in the Middle East in India's favour: when it came to Kashmir, Shia and Sunni united in supporting Pakistan's position. The second owes itself to the collapse of the old world order: the death of the Soviet Union meant that India had to seek out new allies. The third factor that contributed to the deepening of Indo-Israeli ties is less well-known: the rise of Hindu nationalism in India.
To votaries of Hindu nationalism, Israel is something of a lodestar: a nation to be revered for its ability to defeat, and survive among, hostile Muslims. As the liberal Israeli newspaper Haaretz put it, "Relations between Israel and India tend to grow stronger when … India experiences a rightward shift in anti-Muslim public opinion or in leadership".
This explains why Hindu opinion is inflamed even by the most anodyne Indian expression of solidarity with Palestine. At the UN general assembly last month India's prime minister, Manmohan Singh, offered some somniferous words of support for Palestine's membership effort: "India is steadfast in its support for the Palestinian people's struggle for a sovereign, independent, viable and united state of Palestine with East Jerusalem as its capital, living within secure and recognisable borders side by side and at peace with Israel".
No one in Israel seemed to have noticed. None of the major newspapers editorialised it. There wasn't even a specific news item in the Israeli press singling out India. Trade did not suffer. The markets registered no shifts. But this did not deter some Indians from rising to take offence on Israel's behalf. To Sadanand Dhume, a US based commentator who published a hysterical philippic in the Wall Street Journal castigating India for not "throwing its weight behind Israel", Singh's speech was nothing short of a "foreign policy mishap". According to Dhume, who has since been ordained "the go-to guy for all matters India" by an excited colleague of his: "Both India and Israel represent ancient civilisations whose land carries a special spiritual significance for most of its people."
This desire to define citizenship and belonging in the procrustean terms of ancient culture over all other considerations is where Hindutva and Zionism converge. As Koenrad Elst, one of the most influential producers of pro-Hindutva pabulum, has said of the movement's founder, "Veer Savarkar was the Hindu counterpart of a Zionist: he defined the Hindus as a nation attached to a motherland, rather than as a religious community". "True, there is an obvious difference between the situation of the Jews, who had to migrate to their motherland … and the Hindus who merely had to remove the non-Hindu … regime from their territory." This prescription for ethnic cleansing came to life in 1992, when Hindu nationalists brought down the Babri mosque in the northern Indian city of Ayodhya. Their ongoing struggle to seize the Babri land, which belonged to Muslims for over five centuries, looks to Israel's appropriation of Palestinian territory as a useful template.
In 2009, Mumbai's anti-terror squad arrested, among others, an officer in the Indian army, Prasad Purohit, for masterminding a terrorist attack on Pakistani citizens and plotting to overthrow the secular Indian state. In his confession, Purohit admitted to making plans to approach Israel for help. It says something about the state of Israel when the most virulently anti-Muslim terrorists in India reflexively look to it as a potential source of support.
This is tragic – because, in the minds of the formidable men who willed them into existence, India and Israel were alike. Theodor Herzl's conception of Israel was remarkably similar to Mahatma Gandhi's idea of India. Both men refined their ideas gradually. In Der Judenstaat, Herzl presented Israel as a "rampart of Europe against Asia, an outpost of civilisation as opposed to barbarism". Several years later, he offered a more coherent version, a blueprint for a modern pluralistic state, operating under the aegis of Jews, but self-consciously inclusive: visionary Jews and welcoming Arabs people his extraordinary novel Altneuland, one of the founding texts of Zionism. Herzl resolved the conflicts of conscience by transmitting some of the most powerful arguments for Israel's establishment through an Arab character, Reshid Bey. "It was a great blessing," Reshid explains to a sceptical visitor. "Nothing could have been more wretched than an Arab village at the end of the 19th century … [The Arabs] are better off than at any time in the past." But Herzl was alert to the victim's capacity to victimise. In Dr Geyer, we are shown a chilling vision of majoritarian zealotry: a fanatical rabbi, he wants all Arabs expelled from the New Society. Redemption comes in the form of David Littwak, the son of a peasant who believes in a land for all, Arab and Jew, and whose opposition to and victory over Geyer is cast as the highest affirmation of Zionism. Unlike Herzl, Gandhi scorned modern technology for most of his life. In his early life, Gandhi's politics were conspicuously exclusionary. But the India he imagined even after alighting on his Satyagraha campaign relied on a network of Indian David Littwaks to survive. It was a dream that crashed during his own lifetime, with the partition of India.
Today, some of the most powerful politicians in Israel are those who violate Herzl's ideas. Avigdor Lieberman, a Russian immigrant foreign minister of Israel, has openly echoed Geyer's thoughts, calling for the expulsion of Israeli Arabs. In Gandhi's home state, Narendra Modi, a rabidly anti-Muslim politician implicated in the anti-Muslim pogrom of 2002, continues to secure handsome mandates from the largely Hindu electorate.
India's support for Palestine is one of the last remaining precepts from time of Pandit Nehru, India's first prime minister who is loathed by Hindu chauvinists for refusing to turn India into a "Hindu Pakistan". As per the Hindu nationalist narrative, the Congress party's support for Palestine – if such a thing actually exists in any meaningful sense – is a bribe to Indian Muslims. In reality, Indian Muslims have made noticeable efforts to build bridges with Israel. But if anyone can be accused of holding foreign policy hostage to religious bigotry, it is the Hindu nationalist BJP. During its disastrous term in power, from 1997 to 2004, ministers in the government dismissed pro-Palestinians as "more Palestinian than Palestinians themselves". Its foreign minister, Jaswant Singh, suggested that a common civilisational outlook bound India and Israel – implying that Indian Muslims who shared the faith of the Arab majority were somehow alien to India's "civilisation".
India and Israel have much to offer each other and Israel's security must figure as a non-negotiable precondition in New Delhi's support for Palestine. But Hindu nationalists are not concerned with the security of Israel: it is the abandonment of Palestinians they seek.
The seeds of Israel's redemption are embedded in Zionism, which is concerned with housing people, not displacing them. Israel must merely embrace it. It will still be a paternalistic form of "pluralism", but it will be inclusive. On the other hand, Hindutva's very purpose is the disenfranchisement and abolition of religious minorities. So Israelis must wonder what has become of them, their nation, that their most fervid admirers in the most pro-Israeli country in the world happen to be fascists. Until Israel and India undertake an honest reappraisal of their friendship, those who care about the ideas of Herzl and Gandhi must acknowledge this much: theirs is an alliance deepened by prejudice.
An alliance against Islamic extremism must not become an excuse for far-right parties to fan anti-Muslim sentiment
[by] Kapil Komireddi
(guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 25 October 2011)
Babri mosque
Hindu extremists' struggle to seize the Babri mosque in northern India looks to Israel's appropriation of Palestinian land as a template. Photograph: Douglas E Curran/AFP/Getty Images
In 1974, the New York Times journalist Bernard Weinraub described India as "the loneliest post in the world" for Israeli diplomats. Having voted against the creation of Israel at the UN in 1947, India held back from establishing full diplomatic relations with Tel Aviv until 1992. For decades, Israel's presence in India was limited to an immigration office in Mumbai. In between, India voted with the majority to pass UN resolution 3379, condemning Zionism as a form of racism, became one of the first non-Arab states to recognise Palestine's declaration of independence in 1988, and was generally among the more vocal non-Arab voices against Israel.
Today, India is Israel's closest eastern ally and its largest arms market. Annual non-military bilateral trade alone exceeds $4.5bn. Since 2001, the diasporas of the two countries have emerged as energetic allies against a shared enemy: Islamic extremism. A survey by the Israeli foreign ministry in 2009 found India to be the most pro-Israel country in the world, well above the US. Once a bastion of pro-Palestinian sentiment, India recently appeared at the bottom in a worldwide poll of countries sympathetic to Palestinian statehood. Throw a stone in Panaji and it is likely to land on an Israeli backpacking through India after his post-mandatory service.
What precipitated this dramatic shift? Israel had all along been a quiet ally of New Delhi, volunteering clandestine support as India sought to repel attacks by China (in 1962) and Pakistan (in 1965). Israeli officials knew also that India, which had no history of anti-semitism, had arrived at its Israel policy through a combination of post-colonial hauteur, realpolitik – particularly its desire to placate Arab opinion in its contest against Islamic Pakistan – and an ethical commitment to the Palestinian cause. Partly for these reasons, India's anti-Israel actions rarely provoked any anxiety in Tel Aviv.
There are three principal reasons behind the shift in India's attitude. The first is the belated realisation that no amount of deference to Arab sentiment could alter Muslim opinion in the Middle East in India's favour: when it came to Kashmir, Shia and Sunni united in supporting Pakistan's position. The second owes itself to the collapse of the old world order: the death of the Soviet Union meant that India had to seek out new allies. The third factor that contributed to the deepening of Indo-Israeli ties is less well-known: the rise of Hindu nationalism in India.
To votaries of Hindu nationalism, Israel is something of a lodestar: a nation to be revered for its ability to defeat, and survive among, hostile Muslims. As the liberal Israeli newspaper Haaretz put it, "Relations between Israel and India tend to grow stronger when … India experiences a rightward shift in anti-Muslim public opinion or in leadership".
This explains why Hindu opinion is inflamed even by the most anodyne Indian expression of solidarity with Palestine. At the UN general assembly last month India's prime minister, Manmohan Singh, offered some somniferous words of support for Palestine's membership effort: "India is steadfast in its support for the Palestinian people's struggle for a sovereign, independent, viable and united state of Palestine with East Jerusalem as its capital, living within secure and recognisable borders side by side and at peace with Israel".
No one in Israel seemed to have noticed. None of the major newspapers editorialised it. There wasn't even a specific news item in the Israeli press singling out India. Trade did not suffer. The markets registered no shifts. But this did not deter some Indians from rising to take offence on Israel's behalf. To Sadanand Dhume, a US based commentator who published a hysterical philippic in the Wall Street Journal castigating India for not "throwing its weight behind Israel", Singh's speech was nothing short of a "foreign policy mishap". According to Dhume, who has since been ordained "the go-to guy for all matters India" by an excited colleague of his: "Both India and Israel represent ancient civilisations whose land carries a special spiritual significance for most of its people."
This desire to define citizenship and belonging in the procrustean terms of ancient culture over all other considerations is where Hindutva and Zionism converge. As Koenrad Elst, one of the most influential producers of pro-Hindutva pabulum, has said of the movement's founder, "Veer Savarkar was the Hindu counterpart of a Zionist: he defined the Hindus as a nation attached to a motherland, rather than as a religious community". "True, there is an obvious difference between the situation of the Jews, who had to migrate to their motherland … and the Hindus who merely had to remove the non-Hindu … regime from their territory." This prescription for ethnic cleansing came to life in 1992, when Hindu nationalists brought down the Babri mosque in the northern Indian city of Ayodhya. Their ongoing struggle to seize the Babri land, which belonged to Muslims for over five centuries, looks to Israel's appropriation of Palestinian territory as a useful template.
In 2009, Mumbai's anti-terror squad arrested, among others, an officer in the Indian army, Prasad Purohit, for masterminding a terrorist attack on Pakistani citizens and plotting to overthrow the secular Indian state. In his confession, Purohit admitted to making plans to approach Israel for help. It says something about the state of Israel when the most virulently anti-Muslim terrorists in India reflexively look to it as a potential source of support.
This is tragic – because, in the minds of the formidable men who willed them into existence, India and Israel were alike. Theodor Herzl's conception of Israel was remarkably similar to Mahatma Gandhi's idea of India. Both men refined their ideas gradually. In Der Judenstaat, Herzl presented Israel as a "rampart of Europe against Asia, an outpost of civilisation as opposed to barbarism". Several years later, he offered a more coherent version, a blueprint for a modern pluralistic state, operating under the aegis of Jews, but self-consciously inclusive: visionary Jews and welcoming Arabs people his extraordinary novel Altneuland, one of the founding texts of Zionism. Herzl resolved the conflicts of conscience by transmitting some of the most powerful arguments for Israel's establishment through an Arab character, Reshid Bey. "It was a great blessing," Reshid explains to a sceptical visitor. "Nothing could have been more wretched than an Arab village at the end of the 19th century … [The Arabs] are better off than at any time in the past." But Herzl was alert to the victim's capacity to victimise. In Dr Geyer, we are shown a chilling vision of majoritarian zealotry: a fanatical rabbi, he wants all Arabs expelled from the New Society. Redemption comes in the form of David Littwak, the son of a peasant who believes in a land for all, Arab and Jew, and whose opposition to and victory over Geyer is cast as the highest affirmation of Zionism. Unlike Herzl, Gandhi scorned modern technology for most of his life. In his early life, Gandhi's politics were conspicuously exclusionary. But the India he imagined even after alighting on his Satyagraha campaign relied on a network of Indian David Littwaks to survive. It was a dream that crashed during his own lifetime, with the partition of India.
Today, some of the most powerful politicians in Israel are those who violate Herzl's ideas. Avigdor Lieberman, a Russian immigrant foreign minister of Israel, has openly echoed Geyer's thoughts, calling for the expulsion of Israeli Arabs. In Gandhi's home state, Narendra Modi, a rabidly anti-Muslim politician implicated in the anti-Muslim pogrom of 2002, continues to secure handsome mandates from the largely Hindu electorate.
India's support for Palestine is one of the last remaining precepts from time of Pandit Nehru, India's first prime minister who is loathed by Hindu chauvinists for refusing to turn India into a "Hindu Pakistan". As per the Hindu nationalist narrative, the Congress party's support for Palestine – if such a thing actually exists in any meaningful sense – is a bribe to Indian Muslims. In reality, Indian Muslims have made noticeable efforts to build bridges with Israel. But if anyone can be accused of holding foreign policy hostage to religious bigotry, it is the Hindu nationalist BJP. During its disastrous term in power, from 1997 to 2004, ministers in the government dismissed pro-Palestinians as "more Palestinian than Palestinians themselves". Its foreign minister, Jaswant Singh, suggested that a common civilisational outlook bound India and Israel – implying that Indian Muslims who shared the faith of the Arab majority were somehow alien to India's "civilisation".
India and Israel have much to offer each other and Israel's security must figure as a non-negotiable precondition in New Delhi's support for Palestine. But Hindu nationalists are not concerned with the security of Israel: it is the abandonment of Palestinians they seek.
The seeds of Israel's redemption are embedded in Zionism, which is concerned with housing people, not displacing them. Israel must merely embrace it. It will still be a paternalistic form of "pluralism", but it will be inclusive. On the other hand, Hindutva's very purpose is the disenfranchisement and abolition of religious minorities. So Israelis must wonder what has become of them, their nation, that their most fervid admirers in the most pro-Israeli country in the world happen to be fascists. Until Israel and India undertake an honest reappraisal of their friendship, those who care about the ideas of Herzl and Gandhi must acknowledge this much: theirs is an alliance deepened by prejudice.
Hindutva lapdog files a police case against UPA chair for circulating Communal violence bill
From: rediff.com
Janata Party chief Subramanian Swamy on Tuesday filed an FIR in New Delhi against United Progressive Alliance chairperson Sonia Gandhi and members of the National Advisory Council' (which is headed by Gandhi) 'for committing offences of propagating hate against the Hindu community by circulating for enacting as law a draft bill described as Prevention of Communal and Targeted Violence Bill, 2011.'
Click here to READ the full text of Swamy's letter
In his complaint Swamy said that the 'draft bill is mischievous in content of targeting the Hindu community, malafide, unreasonable and prejudicial to public order, is apparent from the second section of explanatory note to the draft bill titled "Key Provisions of the Bill", thereby inciting crimes against the Hindu community with impunity, and thus committing offences under section 153A & B, 295A and 505(2) of the Indian Penal Code.'[. . .]
Full text here
Janata Party chief Subramanian Swamy on Tuesday filed an FIR in New Delhi against United Progressive Alliance chairperson Sonia Gandhi and members of the National Advisory Council' (which is headed by Gandhi) 'for committing offences of propagating hate against the Hindu community by circulating for enacting as law a draft bill described as Prevention of Communal and Targeted Violence Bill, 2011.'
Click here to READ the full text of Swamy's letter
In his complaint Swamy said that the 'draft bill is mischievous in content of targeting the Hindu community, malafide, unreasonable and prejudicial to public order, is apparent from the second section of explanatory note to the draft bill titled "Key Provisions of the Bill", thereby inciting crimes against the Hindu community with impunity, and thus committing offences under section 153A & B, 295A and 505(2) of the Indian Penal Code.'[. . .]
Full text here
October 25, 2011
Poster by Right Wing ABVP welcomes censorship at Delhi university
The Delhi university campus has been splattered by posters by ABVP the right wing students organisation, in Hindi congratulating the vice chancellor of the University for banishing the essay on the Hindu epic Ramayana by AK Ramanujan.
October 24, 2011
Which version of ‘Ramayana’ would Ram read?
From: Tehelka
Which version of ‘Ramayana’ would Ram read?
The ban on Ramanujan’s essay touches a sensitive issue: whether religion should have the upper hand when it comes to freedom of thought
Arpit Parashar and Vishwajoy Mukherjee
New Delhi
The book 'Sita’s Ramayana’ is told from the perspective of Sita
The Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP), the student wing of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), has proved the Churchillean saying “History is written by the victors” to be true by successfully forcing a change in the way history is taught at the Delhi University (DU).
The cover of the new book ‘Sita’s Ramayana’
ALSO READ
Epic Blockbuster
Sita’s House Of Blues
Epic Failures
Two weeks back, the Academic Council of DU decided to drop noted historian AK Ramanujan’s supposedly controversial essay “Three Hundred Ramayana’s: Five Examples and Three Thoughts on Translations” from the Bachelor’s of Arts (BA) course. The essay was introduced in 2006 and was heavily opposed by the ABVP from the very beginning. In 2008, several ABVP workers vandalised the History Department building with heated exchanges with professors and students being reported.
BJP leaders like Vijay Kumar Malhotra as well as ABVP members have since justified their actions. Malhotra has gone on to say that Ramanujan has done a great disservice to the nation.
The Hindutva brigade terms Ramanujan’s essay controversial and blasphemous for two reasons. One, because it details the several “tellings” of the Ramayana across and beyond the Indian subcontinent and questions the assumption that Valmiki’s Ramayana is the original or authentic one. Two, the essay also speaks of versions of the Ramayana in which Ram and Sita are siblings and in certain others where Sita was Ravana’s daughter. This did not go down well with the generation brought up on Valmiki’s Ramayana. As a young ABVP member pointed out, “I grew up watching the Ramayana as shown on the TV (produced and directed by Ramanand Sagar). There can be no other version of it.”
With their religious sensibilities challenged, the ABVP filed a writ petition in 2008 in the Delhi High Court asking for the essay to be scrapped from the course. The matter later reached the Supreme Court, which asked for the formation of a committee to look into the matter. Subsequently, a four-ember panel was formed. In their recommendations to the Academic Council, three panel members said that the essay should be part of the course with the fourth one opposing it on grounds of it being too “complex” for under-graduate level.
The Council, however, ignored the recommendations putting the matter up for voting. Shockingly, only 9 out of the 120-member Council dissented against the majority decision to scrap the essay.
Those who voted against the dropping of the essay are now shocked. The scrapping of an essay by an eminent historian on Ramayana at the behest of a political party is beyond their comprehension. Professor Sanjay Verma, who voted against the scrapping of the essay, says the academia should not succumb to the diktats of political groups. “This kind of politics is killing academia. These are academic issues of great importance. How can the council succumb to pressures of a few people?” he asks. “They [The Academic Council] are letting certain politically motivated groups dictate their agenda: this is Hinduism, and I decide it (the syllabus),” he adds.
The dissenting professors believe that there is still a chance to continue with the essay in the curriculum. The DU Executive Council is yet to approve the Academic Council’s decision. Around 400 students and teachers marched through the streets of DU, North Campus, on Monday protesting against the decision. Armed with a petition asking for Ramanujan’s essay to be part of the curriculum, the demonstrators went to the DU Proctor’s office and to colleges like Hindu, Ramjas and KMC addressing the students and educating them about censorship of education.
But right-wingers like Janata Party President Subramaniam Swamy along with the BJP have already started backing the decision to scrap the essay. Swamy termed the protest against dropping the essay as “ridiculous” terming the protesters “Left-wing activists” and “not genuine scholars and students”.
This is not the first time that a student body has succeeded in changing the curriculum in a university. The student wing of the Shiv Sena last year forced the Mumbai University to drop Rohinton Mistry’s Man Booker Prize shortlisted book Such a Long Journey from the English Literature course. The Bharatiya Vidyarthi Sena said that certain passages in Mistry’s book showed Chharapati Shivaji Maharaj in a negative light and could not be tolerated. The threat of violence on the campus and in colleges across the city forced university to drop the book from the syllabus
For the BJP and their ABVP disciples the importance of Lord Rama and Ramayana is a matter of its very ideological existence. “Our party and its ideology over the past 25 years have been built on the values imbibed in the original (Valmiki) Ramayana, which has the most number of followers than of any other version. It is hurtful to devout Hindus if the story is said in any other way,” a senior BJP leader told TEHELKA requesting not to be named. “No matter what the essay says, it is wrong to question the authenticity of Valmiki’s Ramayana. We should focus our history (learnings) on the deep values imbibed in it,” he added.
Interestingly, Sheo Dutt, Associate Professor at Shaheed Bhagat Sing College, who has been teaching history to undergraduates for more than two decades, disagrees. “These right-wing organisations usually follow Ramcharitmanas version because it portrays Ram as a God and not human,” says Dutt, who was one of the dissenting professors. Valmiki’s Ramayana forms the basis of the larger-than-life narrative in Tulsidas’s version and so is considered the authentic and ‘original’ version by the right-wingers.
Asserting that the BJP-style politics of religion is constantly eroding the education system, he said, “Being religious is one thing, but these self- appointed protectors and defenders of religion are defeating the very purpose of education.”
Dutt personally disagrees with Ramanujan’s argument that there is no original or authentic Ramayana, but believes that the essay is of great academic value and significance. “In my research I have found enough evidence to believe that Valmiki’s is the authentic Ramayana, but the different narratives of the Ramayana in Laos, Cambodia, and Malaysia etc. give an insight into the cultural background and history of the people,” he says. “This essay is about freedom of thought, and they are trying to end the debate,” he points out.
It is not only the various versions of the Ramayana outside India that the ABVP is against; they are also against all the versions of the Ramayana in other languages and cultures in India. Ramanujan’s essay also details the Tamil and Telugu retellings of the Ramayana through the oral tradition. He points out that the Bhakti tradition in Tamil cultures led to significant changes in the way the story of Rama, Sita and Ravana was told. The essay also details the Jain and Buddhist narratives of the Ramayana and how they are different from Valmiki’s Ramayana.
But the Hindutva brigade finds this blasphemous and justifies the vandalism in 2008 comparing it with the freedom struggle. “We had to protest against the blasphemous content of the essay, and as for our method of protest, even the great Bhagat Singh once said, ‘You need an explosion to make the deaf listen to you’,” says Abhineet Gaurav, ex- ABVP member who was part of the mob that vandalised the History Department in 2008. Gaurav now has several cases pending in court following his arrest, but he says he was “defending Sita’s honour” and that he would go to any length to fight for his principles. “I am prepared to kill or be killed,” he says.
The ABVP is now in celebratory mood and sees the Academic council’s decision as a moral victory. “We are planning to put up posters and banners across North Campus to give our thanks to the Council’s decision and also highlight the role that the ABVP played in bringing about this change,” says Vikas Chaudhary, ABVP member, and Delhi University Students Union Vice-President.
The student wing of the Congress, National Students Union of India (NSUI), is reluctant to get into the controversy. “In this country, there won’t be hospitals or schools built in Ram’s name... there will be political rallies and agendas set around it, but never schools or hospitals,” says one of the NSUI workers defending their silence on the matter.
Those protesting the decision like Dutt have little to say except calling on the Hindutva brigade to indulge in the very thing it is bent on stifling--debate. “They are most welcome to engage in a historical debate,” he says.
Arpit Parashar is a Senior Correspondent with Tehelka.com.
arpit.parashar@tehelka.com
Vishwajoy Mukherjee is a Trainee Correspondent with Tehelka.
vishwajoy@tehelka.com
o o o
‘Ramayana’ essay ban blow to freedom of thought
The great epic is not the exclusive property of Hindus, or India; it has transcended borders, writes Samhita Arni
Earlier this year, at the Jaipur Literature Festival, Italian author Roberto Calasso spoke of modernity as an axe that had felled the great tree of Indian mythic literature. Calasso makes a crucial, important point: the Indian literary tradition is a rich, innovative and complex one. And it seems that we Indians are the last to recognise this. The news of Delhi University's ban on Ramanujan's seminal essay “Three Hundred Ramayanas: Five examples and three thoughts on translations” makes exactly that point: we are doing our best to deny our literary heritage.
The ban is dangerous in several ways with some commenting that the essay is too “difficult” for college-level students. I disagree. I have long admired the accessibility of Ramanujan's writing: he doesn't use the complex, highfalutin language that many academic papers contain and his ideas are easy to grasp. The ban also suggests that students must be ‘protected’ from certain ideas. I feel this approach goes against the very spirit of receiving education, borders on indoctrination, impinges on our freedom of thought suggesting there is just ‘one, right’ way of thinking. And it worries me too for the one thing that I have learnt by living in India (and what makes our pluralistic society work) is that there is no single, ‘right’ way of thinking.
Those who allege that the essay contains “blasphemous” material seem to be uncomfortable with the idea of "Many Ramayanas", which acknowledges that the Ramayana is not just confined to Hindus, or Indians, but has spread outside India and among other faiths--to Buddhist Thailand, Muslim Indonesia and even to Japan. Stories don't recognise borders or boundaries; they travel and are retold. And this is precisely why the Ramayana is still so important--for every language and culture has made the epic its own. Every re-teller of the story has added a new nuance to the story.
This tradition recognises and acknowledges the power and the (literally) life-and-death importance of not just storytelling, but also re-telling. In Valmiki's Ramayana, as an unsuspecting Lava and Kusha sing the poem that their teacher has taught them, Rama, their audience, realises not only are these boys singing his story, but that they are his sons.
In “Tell it to the Walls,” an essay about how stories must be--have to be--told, Ramanujan relates an anecdote about the Tamil poet Kamban. After penning his version of the Ramayana, Kamban has difficulty getting the approval of all 3,000 Saivite scholars at Chidambaram. He approaches them with his poem at the funeral for a boy who has died from snake bite. The scholars are shocked finding the time inappropriate. But Kamban responds by reciting the verses which mention how Lakshmana comes back to senses by consuming the Sanjeevani herb after being hit by the Nagastra. As Kamban recites these lines, a cobra appears, sucks the poison from the boy’s body ad he comes back to life.
Ramanujan continues a little beyond this. He also mentions how Kamban must visit rival communities--the Vaishnavites at Srirangam, Saivites at Chidambaram, and the Jains--with his poem. He must even tell a courtesan this story, writes Ramanujan. It's clear from this anecdote that the Ramayana is for everyone like Saivites, Vasihnavites, Jains and courtesans, and that they all constitute an audience for the Ramayana and the epic isn't just the property of one group, religion, or type of people.
The fact that due to this ban, future generations of students (and writers) will be ill-equipped to understand and build upon our own ancient, but still alive, traditions of storytelling is tragic. But I also fear that this ban could have more serious consequences for it seems to me that the Ramayana tradition, in it's multiplicity of forms and versions, reflects the intrinsic and pluralistic nature of our society. I am reminded of Calasso's metaphor: this ban doesn't just affect one, wondrously great tree, it affects a whole eco-system.
Samhita Arni is a Bengaluru-based writer.
o o o
‘I must write of Him as I see Him in my imagination’
Delhi University's Academic Council has removed AK Ramanujan's celebrated essay Three Hundred Ramayanas from the History syllabus amid much controversy. Nakul Krishna argues that the fuss is surprising: no matter how iconoclastic, retellings of traditional texts have always been encouraged in Indian history
C Rajagopalachari recalled a meeting with Mahatma Gandhi when the two old men were concerned about the prospect of a young girl they both knew making an unwise marriage. How, wondered Rajaji, had the girl in question acquired her notions of romantic love without having read any modern love stories? But surely, Gandhiji pointed out, she had read the Ramayana. Was it not ‘a love story too'?
The thought struck Rajaji as profound, and love in all its forms—filial, romantic and tender, but also vicious, manipulative and violent—was at the heart of his telling of the story, first written in Tamil, and widely translated since. It has been one of the most common introductions to the story for generations of Indian readers.
Rajaji began his task ‘not without fear and trembling’, conscious that it ‘was perhaps presumptuous on [his] part to have begun the task’, and that ‘[l]earned men [would] no doubt find many faults’ in his telling. Further, he was acutely aware that his own version followed in the footsteps of a great many others: “All the languages of India have the Ramayana and Mahabharata retold by their poets, with additions and variations of their own.” Yet, he dared risk the scorn of the learned and the boredom of many from what can only be described as love, for the epic, its grandeur and its poetry, its sure knowledge of the heights and depths of the human heart.
Rajaji’s colleague in the Swatantra Party, the redoubtable Gujarati novelist K M Munshi had felt similar trepidation when he had begun his popular series on the life of Krishna. ‘It was an almost impossible venture,’ he wrote,
“…but like hundreds of authors, good, bad and indifferent, from all parts of India for centuries, I could not help offering him whatever little of imagination and creative power I possessed, feeble though they were... I trust He will forgive me for the liberty I am taking, but I must write of Him as I see Him in my imagination.”
The 20 Century scholar AK Ramanujan (whose own name is derived from the epic: ‘Rama’s younger brother’, an epithet’s of Lakshmana’s) writes of how all Ramayanas after Valmiki’s
“…play on the knowledge of previous tellings ... In several of the later Ramayanas (such as the Adhyatma Ramayana, 16th C.), when Rama is exiled, he does not want Sita to go with him into the forest. Sita argues with him. At first she uses the usual arguments: she is his wife, she should share his sufferings, ... and so on. When he still resists the idea, she is furious. She bursts out, “Countless Ramayanas have been composed before this. Do you know of one where Sita doesn’t go with Rama to the forest?” That clinches the argument, and she goes with him.”
One returns to the remarks of these stalwarts of Indian conservatism, devout Hindus both, in the wake of the recent decision of Delhi University’s Academic Council to remove Ramanujan’s celebrated essay on the Ramayana tradition from the BA (Hons) history syllabus. It is difficult to know for sure if the decision was in fact politically motivated, or perhaps made for fear of a repetition of the violence in 2008 when student activists of the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) complained that the essay titled Three Hundred Ramayanas: Five Examples and Three Thoughts on Translations was ‘blasphemous’.
In the face of such anger and fear, it is, one hopes, not merely sentimental to return to the impulses that have driven so many poets and storytellers across south and south-east Asia to turn to the Ramayana story: love, for one, and an attitude to the Ramayana not as a single text but ‘a living tradition and a living faith’, as the 19 Century Bengali intellectual Romesh Dutt put it.
Dutt, who himself did a verse translation of the Ramayana into brisk Victorian couplets published in 1899, pointed out how
"the Ramayana had the greatest influence in inspiring our modern poets and forming our modern tongues. Southern India took the lead, and a translation of the Ramayana in the Tamil language appeared as early as A.D. 1100. ... Tulasi Das's Ramayana is the great classic of the Hindi language, Krittibas's Ramayana is a classic in the Bengali language, and Sridhar's Ramayana is a classic in the Mahratta language. Generations of Hindus ... have heard [these versions] recited in the houses of the rich; and they have seen it acted on the stage at religious festivals in every great town and every populous village through the length and breadth of India."
Dutt was well aware of exactly how alive the Ramayana tradition was, even in the late 19 Century. He was a great admirer of his namesake and contemporary, Madhusudan Dutt, and described his Meghnad Badh Kavya as ‘a masterpiece of epic poetry. The reader who can feel, and appreciate the sublime, will rise from a study of this great work with mixed sensations of veneration and awe’.
Madhusudan Dutt, despite the iconoclasm of his heroic treatment of the character of Meghnad, Ravana’s son, faced little criticism from his readers. (What criticism he received, from a young Tagore among others, spoke of the work’s poetic faults rather than its possible blasphemies.) In a letter to a friend, Dutt narrated the following anecdote:
“Some days ago I had occasion to go to the Chinabazar. I saw a man seated in a shop and deeply poring over Meghanad. I stepped in and asked him what he was reading. He said in very good English – ‘I am reading a new poem, Sir!’ ‘A poem!’ I said, ‘I thought that there was no poetry in your language.’ He replied – ‘Why, Sir, here is poetry that would make any nation proud.’”
Pride in the boundless capacity of ancient epics to inspire yet new generations of poets and scholars has a long tradition in India. Retelling stories of Rama, even when these tellings have been thought of as iconoclastic, has long been the normal expression of faith and love for the tradition. It is not blasphemy.
Nakul Krishna is pursuing a doctorate in philosophy at the University of Oxford.
Which version of ‘Ramayana’ would Ram read?
The ban on Ramanujan’s essay touches a sensitive issue: whether religion should have the upper hand when it comes to freedom of thought
Arpit Parashar and Vishwajoy Mukherjee
New Delhi
The book 'Sita’s Ramayana’ is told from the perspective of Sita
The Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP), the student wing of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), has proved the Churchillean saying “History is written by the victors” to be true by successfully forcing a change in the way history is taught at the Delhi University (DU).
The cover of the new book ‘Sita’s Ramayana’
ALSO READ
Epic Blockbuster
Sita’s House Of Blues
Epic Failures
Two weeks back, the Academic Council of DU decided to drop noted historian AK Ramanujan’s supposedly controversial essay “Three Hundred Ramayana’s: Five Examples and Three Thoughts on Translations” from the Bachelor’s of Arts (BA) course. The essay was introduced in 2006 and was heavily opposed by the ABVP from the very beginning. In 2008, several ABVP workers vandalised the History Department building with heated exchanges with professors and students being reported.
BJP leaders like Vijay Kumar Malhotra as well as ABVP members have since justified their actions. Malhotra has gone on to say that Ramanujan has done a great disservice to the nation.
The Hindutva brigade terms Ramanujan’s essay controversial and blasphemous for two reasons. One, because it details the several “tellings” of the Ramayana across and beyond the Indian subcontinent and questions the assumption that Valmiki’s Ramayana is the original or authentic one. Two, the essay also speaks of versions of the Ramayana in which Ram and Sita are siblings and in certain others where Sita was Ravana’s daughter. This did not go down well with the generation brought up on Valmiki’s Ramayana. As a young ABVP member pointed out, “I grew up watching the Ramayana as shown on the TV (produced and directed by Ramanand Sagar). There can be no other version of it.”
With their religious sensibilities challenged, the ABVP filed a writ petition in 2008 in the Delhi High Court asking for the essay to be scrapped from the course. The matter later reached the Supreme Court, which asked for the formation of a committee to look into the matter. Subsequently, a four-ember panel was formed. In their recommendations to the Academic Council, three panel members said that the essay should be part of the course with the fourth one opposing it on grounds of it being too “complex” for under-graduate level.
The Council, however, ignored the recommendations putting the matter up for voting. Shockingly, only 9 out of the 120-member Council dissented against the majority decision to scrap the essay.
Those who voted against the dropping of the essay are now shocked. The scrapping of an essay by an eminent historian on Ramayana at the behest of a political party is beyond their comprehension. Professor Sanjay Verma, who voted against the scrapping of the essay, says the academia should not succumb to the diktats of political groups. “This kind of politics is killing academia. These are academic issues of great importance. How can the council succumb to pressures of a few people?” he asks. “They [The Academic Council] are letting certain politically motivated groups dictate their agenda: this is Hinduism, and I decide it (the syllabus),” he adds.
The dissenting professors believe that there is still a chance to continue with the essay in the curriculum. The DU Executive Council is yet to approve the Academic Council’s decision. Around 400 students and teachers marched through the streets of DU, North Campus, on Monday protesting against the decision. Armed with a petition asking for Ramanujan’s essay to be part of the curriculum, the demonstrators went to the DU Proctor’s office and to colleges like Hindu, Ramjas and KMC addressing the students and educating them about censorship of education.
But right-wingers like Janata Party President Subramaniam Swamy along with the BJP have already started backing the decision to scrap the essay. Swamy termed the protest against dropping the essay as “ridiculous” terming the protesters “Left-wing activists” and “not genuine scholars and students”.
This is not the first time that a student body has succeeded in changing the curriculum in a university. The student wing of the Shiv Sena last year forced the Mumbai University to drop Rohinton Mistry’s Man Booker Prize shortlisted book Such a Long Journey from the English Literature course. The Bharatiya Vidyarthi Sena said that certain passages in Mistry’s book showed Chharapati Shivaji Maharaj in a negative light and could not be tolerated. The threat of violence on the campus and in colleges across the city forced university to drop the book from the syllabus
For the BJP and their ABVP disciples the importance of Lord Rama and Ramayana is a matter of its very ideological existence. “Our party and its ideology over the past 25 years have been built on the values imbibed in the original (Valmiki) Ramayana, which has the most number of followers than of any other version. It is hurtful to devout Hindus if the story is said in any other way,” a senior BJP leader told TEHELKA requesting not to be named. “No matter what the essay says, it is wrong to question the authenticity of Valmiki’s Ramayana. We should focus our history (learnings) on the deep values imbibed in it,” he added.
Interestingly, Sheo Dutt, Associate Professor at Shaheed Bhagat Sing College, who has been teaching history to undergraduates for more than two decades, disagrees. “These right-wing organisations usually follow Ramcharitmanas version because it portrays Ram as a God and not human,” says Dutt, who was one of the dissenting professors. Valmiki’s Ramayana forms the basis of the larger-than-life narrative in Tulsidas’s version and so is considered the authentic and ‘original’ version by the right-wingers.
Asserting that the BJP-style politics of religion is constantly eroding the education system, he said, “Being religious is one thing, but these self- appointed protectors and defenders of religion are defeating the very purpose of education.”
Dutt personally disagrees with Ramanujan’s argument that there is no original or authentic Ramayana, but believes that the essay is of great academic value and significance. “In my research I have found enough evidence to believe that Valmiki’s is the authentic Ramayana, but the different narratives of the Ramayana in Laos, Cambodia, and Malaysia etc. give an insight into the cultural background and history of the people,” he says. “This essay is about freedom of thought, and they are trying to end the debate,” he points out.
It is not only the various versions of the Ramayana outside India that the ABVP is against; they are also against all the versions of the Ramayana in other languages and cultures in India. Ramanujan’s essay also details the Tamil and Telugu retellings of the Ramayana through the oral tradition. He points out that the Bhakti tradition in Tamil cultures led to significant changes in the way the story of Rama, Sita and Ravana was told. The essay also details the Jain and Buddhist narratives of the Ramayana and how they are different from Valmiki’s Ramayana.
But the Hindutva brigade finds this blasphemous and justifies the vandalism in 2008 comparing it with the freedom struggle. “We had to protest against the blasphemous content of the essay, and as for our method of protest, even the great Bhagat Singh once said, ‘You need an explosion to make the deaf listen to you’,” says Abhineet Gaurav, ex- ABVP member who was part of the mob that vandalised the History Department in 2008. Gaurav now has several cases pending in court following his arrest, but he says he was “defending Sita’s honour” and that he would go to any length to fight for his principles. “I am prepared to kill or be killed,” he says.
The ABVP is now in celebratory mood and sees the Academic council’s decision as a moral victory. “We are planning to put up posters and banners across North Campus to give our thanks to the Council’s decision and also highlight the role that the ABVP played in bringing about this change,” says Vikas Chaudhary, ABVP member, and Delhi University Students Union Vice-President.
The student wing of the Congress, National Students Union of India (NSUI), is reluctant to get into the controversy. “In this country, there won’t be hospitals or schools built in Ram’s name... there will be political rallies and agendas set around it, but never schools or hospitals,” says one of the NSUI workers defending their silence on the matter.
Those protesting the decision like Dutt have little to say except calling on the Hindutva brigade to indulge in the very thing it is bent on stifling--debate. “They are most welcome to engage in a historical debate,” he says.
Arpit Parashar is a Senior Correspondent with Tehelka.com.
arpit.parashar@tehelka.com
Vishwajoy Mukherjee is a Trainee Correspondent with Tehelka.
vishwajoy@tehelka.com
o o o
‘Ramayana’ essay ban blow to freedom of thought
The great epic is not the exclusive property of Hindus, or India; it has transcended borders, writes Samhita Arni
Earlier this year, at the Jaipur Literature Festival, Italian author Roberto Calasso spoke of modernity as an axe that had felled the great tree of Indian mythic literature. Calasso makes a crucial, important point: the Indian literary tradition is a rich, innovative and complex one. And it seems that we Indians are the last to recognise this. The news of Delhi University's ban on Ramanujan's seminal essay “Three Hundred Ramayanas: Five examples and three thoughts on translations” makes exactly that point: we are doing our best to deny our literary heritage.
The ban is dangerous in several ways with some commenting that the essay is too “difficult” for college-level students. I disagree. I have long admired the accessibility of Ramanujan's writing: he doesn't use the complex, highfalutin language that many academic papers contain and his ideas are easy to grasp. The ban also suggests that students must be ‘protected’ from certain ideas. I feel this approach goes against the very spirit of receiving education, borders on indoctrination, impinges on our freedom of thought suggesting there is just ‘one, right’ way of thinking. And it worries me too for the one thing that I have learnt by living in India (and what makes our pluralistic society work) is that there is no single, ‘right’ way of thinking.
Those who allege that the essay contains “blasphemous” material seem to be uncomfortable with the idea of "Many Ramayanas", which acknowledges that the Ramayana is not just confined to Hindus, or Indians, but has spread outside India and among other faiths--to Buddhist Thailand, Muslim Indonesia and even to Japan. Stories don't recognise borders or boundaries; they travel and are retold. And this is precisely why the Ramayana is still so important--for every language and culture has made the epic its own. Every re-teller of the story has added a new nuance to the story.
This tradition recognises and acknowledges the power and the (literally) life-and-death importance of not just storytelling, but also re-telling. In Valmiki's Ramayana, as an unsuspecting Lava and Kusha sing the poem that their teacher has taught them, Rama, their audience, realises not only are these boys singing his story, but that they are his sons.
In “Tell it to the Walls,” an essay about how stories must be--have to be--told, Ramanujan relates an anecdote about the Tamil poet Kamban. After penning his version of the Ramayana, Kamban has difficulty getting the approval of all 3,000 Saivite scholars at Chidambaram. He approaches them with his poem at the funeral for a boy who has died from snake bite. The scholars are shocked finding the time inappropriate. But Kamban responds by reciting the verses which mention how Lakshmana comes back to senses by consuming the Sanjeevani herb after being hit by the Nagastra. As Kamban recites these lines, a cobra appears, sucks the poison from the boy’s body ad he comes back to life.
Ramanujan continues a little beyond this. He also mentions how Kamban must visit rival communities--the Vaishnavites at Srirangam, Saivites at Chidambaram, and the Jains--with his poem. He must even tell a courtesan this story, writes Ramanujan. It's clear from this anecdote that the Ramayana is for everyone like Saivites, Vasihnavites, Jains and courtesans, and that they all constitute an audience for the Ramayana and the epic isn't just the property of one group, religion, or type of people.
The fact that due to this ban, future generations of students (and writers) will be ill-equipped to understand and build upon our own ancient, but still alive, traditions of storytelling is tragic. But I also fear that this ban could have more serious consequences for it seems to me that the Ramayana tradition, in it's multiplicity of forms and versions, reflects the intrinsic and pluralistic nature of our society. I am reminded of Calasso's metaphor: this ban doesn't just affect one, wondrously great tree, it affects a whole eco-system.
Samhita Arni is a Bengaluru-based writer.
o o o
‘I must write of Him as I see Him in my imagination’
Delhi University's Academic Council has removed AK Ramanujan's celebrated essay Three Hundred Ramayanas from the History syllabus amid much controversy. Nakul Krishna argues that the fuss is surprising: no matter how iconoclastic, retellings of traditional texts have always been encouraged in Indian history
C Rajagopalachari recalled a meeting with Mahatma Gandhi when the two old men were concerned about the prospect of a young girl they both knew making an unwise marriage. How, wondered Rajaji, had the girl in question acquired her notions of romantic love without having read any modern love stories? But surely, Gandhiji pointed out, she had read the Ramayana. Was it not ‘a love story too'?
The thought struck Rajaji as profound, and love in all its forms—filial, romantic and tender, but also vicious, manipulative and violent—was at the heart of his telling of the story, first written in Tamil, and widely translated since. It has been one of the most common introductions to the story for generations of Indian readers.
Rajaji began his task ‘not without fear and trembling’, conscious that it ‘was perhaps presumptuous on [his] part to have begun the task’, and that ‘[l]earned men [would] no doubt find many faults’ in his telling. Further, he was acutely aware that his own version followed in the footsteps of a great many others: “All the languages of India have the Ramayana and Mahabharata retold by their poets, with additions and variations of their own.” Yet, he dared risk the scorn of the learned and the boredom of many from what can only be described as love, for the epic, its grandeur and its poetry, its sure knowledge of the heights and depths of the human heart.
Rajaji’s colleague in the Swatantra Party, the redoubtable Gujarati novelist K M Munshi had felt similar trepidation when he had begun his popular series on the life of Krishna. ‘It was an almost impossible venture,’ he wrote,
“…but like hundreds of authors, good, bad and indifferent, from all parts of India for centuries, I could not help offering him whatever little of imagination and creative power I possessed, feeble though they were... I trust He will forgive me for the liberty I am taking, but I must write of Him as I see Him in my imagination.”
The 20 Century scholar AK Ramanujan (whose own name is derived from the epic: ‘Rama’s younger brother’, an epithet’s of Lakshmana’s) writes of how all Ramayanas after Valmiki’s
“…play on the knowledge of previous tellings ... In several of the later Ramayanas (such as the Adhyatma Ramayana, 16th C.), when Rama is exiled, he does not want Sita to go with him into the forest. Sita argues with him. At first she uses the usual arguments: she is his wife, she should share his sufferings, ... and so on. When he still resists the idea, she is furious. She bursts out, “Countless Ramayanas have been composed before this. Do you know of one where Sita doesn’t go with Rama to the forest?” That clinches the argument, and she goes with him.”
One returns to the remarks of these stalwarts of Indian conservatism, devout Hindus both, in the wake of the recent decision of Delhi University’s Academic Council to remove Ramanujan’s celebrated essay on the Ramayana tradition from the BA (Hons) history syllabus. It is difficult to know for sure if the decision was in fact politically motivated, or perhaps made for fear of a repetition of the violence in 2008 when student activists of the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) complained that the essay titled Three Hundred Ramayanas: Five Examples and Three Thoughts on Translations was ‘blasphemous’.
In the face of such anger and fear, it is, one hopes, not merely sentimental to return to the impulses that have driven so many poets and storytellers across south and south-east Asia to turn to the Ramayana story: love, for one, and an attitude to the Ramayana not as a single text but ‘a living tradition and a living faith’, as the 19 Century Bengali intellectual Romesh Dutt put it.
Dutt, who himself did a verse translation of the Ramayana into brisk Victorian couplets published in 1899, pointed out how
"the Ramayana had the greatest influence in inspiring our modern poets and forming our modern tongues. Southern India took the lead, and a translation of the Ramayana in the Tamil language appeared as early as A.D. 1100. ... Tulasi Das's Ramayana is the great classic of the Hindi language, Krittibas's Ramayana is a classic in the Bengali language, and Sridhar's Ramayana is a classic in the Mahratta language. Generations of Hindus ... have heard [these versions] recited in the houses of the rich; and they have seen it acted on the stage at religious festivals in every great town and every populous village through the length and breadth of India."
Dutt was well aware of exactly how alive the Ramayana tradition was, even in the late 19 Century. He was a great admirer of his namesake and contemporary, Madhusudan Dutt, and described his Meghnad Badh Kavya as ‘a masterpiece of epic poetry. The reader who can feel, and appreciate the sublime, will rise from a study of this great work with mixed sensations of veneration and awe’.
Madhusudan Dutt, despite the iconoclasm of his heroic treatment of the character of Meghnad, Ravana’s son, faced little criticism from his readers. (What criticism he received, from a young Tagore among others, spoke of the work’s poetic faults rather than its possible blasphemies.) In a letter to a friend, Dutt narrated the following anecdote:
“Some days ago I had occasion to go to the Chinabazar. I saw a man seated in a shop and deeply poring over Meghanad. I stepped in and asked him what he was reading. He said in very good English – ‘I am reading a new poem, Sir!’ ‘A poem!’ I said, ‘I thought that there was no poetry in your language.’ He replied – ‘Why, Sir, here is poetry that would make any nation proud.’”
Pride in the boundless capacity of ancient epics to inspire yet new generations of poets and scholars has a long tradition in India. Retelling stories of Rama, even when these tellings have been thought of as iconoclastic, has long been the normal expression of faith and love for the tradition. It is not blasphemy.
Nakul Krishna is pursuing a doctorate in philosophy at the University of Oxford.
Delhi University teachers and students marched in protest and demand re-introduction Ramanujan's essay on Ramayana (photos, newsreport + TV programme)
On 24 October 2011 Delhi University teachers and students marched in protest and demanded re-introduction of Ramanujan's essay on Ramayana in the History course
Photos below by Mukul Dube
selected news reports :
The Hindu
History Dept. demands re-introduction of Ramanujan's essay on Ramayana
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article2568546.ece
The Times of India
Ramanujan essay: Debate turns political
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/Ramanujan-essay-Debate-turns-political/articleshow/10480716.cms
o o o
Television Video from CNN-IBN:
CNN-IBN programme - FTN: Can there be only one reading of the Ramayana?
Photos below by Mukul Dube
selected news reports :
The Hindu
History Dept. demands re-introduction of Ramanujan's essay on Ramayana
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article2568546.ece
The Times of India
Ramanujan essay: Debate turns political
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/Ramanujan-essay-Debate-turns-political/articleshow/10480716.cms
o o o
Television Video from CNN-IBN:
CNN-IBN programme - FTN: Can there be only one reading of the Ramayana?
RSS in Yeddy’s home state of Karnataka still ‘swears’ by him
From: Mail Today, 24 October 2011
RSS in Yeddy’s home state still ‘swears’ by him
By Aravind Gowda in Bangalore
Advani to take rath to Karnataka
AFTER taking several “ favours” from the scam- tainted former chief minister B. S. Yeddyurappa, the RSS is developing cold feet over disowning him as it faces the imminent risk of getting “ exposed” by the same man.
The sudden U- turn by BJP leader L. K. Advani on taking his anti- corruption campaign to Karnataka after cancelling it has also come as a shot in the arm for the former CM. The Karnataka RSS unit and religious institutions backed by it have received unprecedented favours from Yeddyurappa during his three- year reign as the CM. It is in no position to antagonise Yeddyurappa by calling him an “ embarrassment” to the BJP. When RSS joint secretary Dattatreya Hosabale launched a scathing attack on Yeddyurappa on Saturday, leaders of the Karnataka RSS unit were quite upset. They even huddled into a meeting to defuse the crisis. A few BJP functionaries swung into damage control mode, advising the media to downplay the RSS leader’s remarks.
As far as the Karnataka RSS unit is concerned, it is still under the control of Yeddyurappa. From appointing leaders recommended by the state RSS to coveted posts of government boards and corporations, to nominating RSS functionaries to Karnataka Public Service Commission and other government committees, the former CM had given consent to every request placed before him.
The Karnataka RSS has equal representation from the Lingayat and Brahmin communities and both are rallying for Yeddyurappa owing to the benefits he bestowed upon them. The biggest among the favours bestowed upon the RSS is the deregulation of the powerful Mahabaleshwara temple in Gokarna ( coastal Karnataka), which is controlled by the Brahmins. The temple was under the ambit of the government for more than two decades. None of the previous governments entertained the local Brahmin community’s request to deregulate the temple. But Yeddyurappa acceded to their request and handed over the temple’s management to the Ramachandrapura Mutt ( run by local Brahminicals).
“ When Yeddyurappa has done so much for the RSS, how can the national leaders call him an embarrassment?” a senior RSS functionary from Karnataka asked.
The RSS, at the national level, wants to steer clear of leaders associated with corruption.
Incidentally, Dattatreya Hosabale hails from Sagar in Shimoga district, Yeddyurappa’s home constituency. If sources are to be believed, Yeddyurappa and Hosable reportedly crossed swords during the 80s and 90s when they worked at the grassroots level of the RSS. Sources also indicate that the role of Yeddyurappa’s arch rival within the party, Ananth Kumar, cannot be ruled out in the RSS’ verbal attack on the former CM. “ The political scene in the Karnataka BJP is undergoing a paradigm shift. Yeddyurappa is now a hot potato for the BJP. The national leaders want to distance Yeddyurappa from the BJP by blaming him for ignoring the senior RSS leaders’ advice. But what will be the BJP’s prospects in the absence of a leader like Yeddyurappa? The BJP has still two more years to go. But they are heading nowhere. Who will lead the party’s campaign in the next election?” political historian Dr A. Veerappa said.
The BJP appears to be unclear of its strategy on how to handle Yeddyurappa.
On Saturday, the BJP said L. K. Advani’s nationwide campaign against corruption would skip Karnataka. But Advani quickly changed his stand on Sunday, “ My scheduled yatra to Karnataka, including Bangalore is very much on”. He, however, avoided responding to queries on Yeddyurappa. “ I do not wish to say anything on Yeddyurappa,” he said. Since the arrest of Yeddyurappa, the BJP leader has cancelled two press conferences during his visit to Madhya Pradesh.
The whole process seems to have strengthened Yeddyurappa further. Yeddyurappa had time and again effectively used the “ threat card” to safeguard his seat. “ What scared the BJP in November last year was Yeddyurappa’s threat to expose the national leaders who took various kinds of favours from him after he became the CM. In fact, a few national leaders too had recommended de- notification of lands in and around Bangalore. Following this, the national leaders were divided over his exit,” an aide of the former CM said.
October 23, 2011
The Ramayaana is a continuing, many-sided conversation between cultures and religions (Samhita Arni)
From: The Indian Express
The Many True Kandas
Samhita Arni
Oct 23 2011, 03:30 hrs New Delhi:
The Ramayaana is a continuing, many-sided conversation between cultures and religions. By scrapping AK Ramanujan’s essay from its syllabus, can Delhi University ignore that exchange?
Last fortnight, Delhi University decided to remove AK Ramanujan's essay Three Hundred Ramayanas: Five Examples and Three Thoughts on Translation from its history syllabus, perhaps in response to earlier protests in 2008 over the inclusion of this essay. The decision scares me for many reasons, partly because it suggests that a viewpoint is beginning to prevail which perpetuates the notion of the Ramayana as exclusive, Hindu property, and ignores the fact that the Ramayana has been re-told — and is still being re-told — by Muslims, Buddhists, Jains and people of other faiths.
My own life bears this out. As a child who accompanied a diplomat father on various overseas postings — Indonesia, Pakistan and Thailand — the one constant in all the cultures I spent my childhood in was the Ramayana. In Indonesia, a largely Muslim country, we watched Wayang Kulit, the shadow puppet theatre which has plays on stories from the Ramayana. In Pakistan, I was told as a five-year-old that “Lahore” came from Lavapuri, from a legend that Lahore was founded by Ram's son Lava. In Chennai, my birthplace and the city my mother comes from, stories are still told of the founder of the Dravidian movement, EV Ramasamy Naicker, Periyar, who wrote a banned version of the Ramayana casting Ravana as a tragic hero, and, in an inversion of what happens at Dussehra, gathered hordes on the beach to burn images of Ram. In Thailand, one finds the Ramayana in many places, in the names of its kings, in Ayutthaya city (from Ayodhya), and in a beautiful poem inscribed on the walls of a wat (monastery), in which Ravana declares his undying love for Sita. Further afield, traces of the Ramayana linger in Angkor Wat in Buddhist Cambodia and Laos (like Lahore, also supposedly named after Lava.)
And yet, the Ramayana that is in ascendance in the popular imagination —the one repeated to me by my Hindu family — was stripped of all these delightful cadences and associations. From a story inhabited with magic, sorcerers, demons, talking animals and flying monkeys, it shrunk to a hagiography, a story about an ideal man/God, and his ideal wife. It was a story that prescribed roles for men and women, and was told in such a way that it failed to grasp my imagination as a child.
What could a girl — encouraged to think and question, to want and aspire for more than her mother and grandmother had ever had — admire in the silent, suffering, self-sacrificing Sita of popular imagination?
Five years ago, I rediscovered the Ramayana. I returned to India after almost a decade abroad, and I found a country where the Ramayana is still frequently referred to. (The references still amaze me. Recently, the Supreme Court mentioned the Lakshman rekha in the 2G case. In a school debate which I recently judged, the term Ram Rajya made a frequent appearance. A reality show on a Kannada channel named a line that participants could not cross the Lakshman rekha.) Moreover, the Ramayana was, and still is, a part of discussions about Indian identity and the state.
When I delved into the Ramayana as an adult, I was surprised by what I found.
I was astonished to discover in one version that Janaka found Sita, as a child, playing with Shiva's bow, and watched her lift it. Hence, he devised the test for her Swayamvara: for if Sita could lift the bow as a child, the man who would marry her, must, at least, be able to string the bow. This Sita was physically strong.
Reading Arshia Sattar's masterful translation of Valmiki's Ramayana, I discovered that Valmiki's Sita is one who says that dharma is sukusma — subtle and intangible. This Sita advises Ram, in the forest, to give up his weapons for the duration of exile and live a life in keeping with the peaceful, non-material dharma of the forest and Vanaprastha. This Sita was wise.
I became fascinated by the Ramayana and it's multiplicity of retelling. (This fascination has led to two books — a speculative fiction thriller that's due out next year, and a graphic novel Sita's Ramayana with Patua artist Moyna Chitrakar.)
In the process of creating a text to accompany Moyna's artwork, I explored the folk traditions, where women, singing in Sita's voice, expressed their own problems while describing her suffering. In her voice, they express their own lives.
The Ramayana has been re-told, recast many, many times. This polymorphous tradition is precisely what AK Ramanujan's essay explores. Here is Ramanujan's account of my favorite anecdote:
“To some extent all later Ramayanas play on the knowledge of previous tellings: they are meta-Ramayanas. I cannot resist repeating my favourite example. In several of the later Ramayanas (such as the Adhyatma Ramayana, 16th C.), when Rama is exiled, he does not want Sita to go with him into the forest. Sita argues with him. At first she uses the usual arguments: she is his wife, she should share his sufferings, exile herself in his exile, and so on. When he still resists the idea, she is furious. She bursts out, ‘Countless Ramayanas have been composed before this. Do you know of one where Sita doesn’t go with Rama to the forest?’ That clinches the argument, and she goes with him."
What emerges from Ramanujan's essay is not just that the Ramayana is a polymorphous tradition. It's also a many-sided conversation, that spans cultures, languages, centuries and religions. There are Buddhist and Jain versions of the Ramayana. (The Patuas, the itinerant storytelling tribe to which Moyna belongs, are a mixture of Muslims, Buddhists and Hindus, who all retell the Ramayana.)
Retelling the Ramayana has been a subversive act, a political act. Molla, a Telegu poetess and a potter's daughter, retold the Ramayana in simple language (in contrast to the ornate, difficult language that Brahmins used) and thus made it accessible to everyone. The Kannada writer Kuvempu, a Ram bhakt, struggled with the treatment of Shambukha (the shudra who Ram beheads in the Uttara Kanda for performing tapasya, which causes the death of a Brahmin's son) and wrote Shudra Tapasvi, which inverts the episode. Michael Madusudhan Dutt pioneered the use of blank verse in Bengali literature in the Meghnad Badh Kabya, a poem on Ravana's son Meghnad (aka Indrajit).
I've been to shadow puppet performances, and watched audiences laugh uproariously at shows that interpolate references to contemporary events (and characters from the Arabian Nights). Scholars speculate that the story of Hanuman, traveling on the Silk Route centuries ago, inspired the tales of the Monkey God, Sun Wukong, the hero of the 16th century Chinese epic Journey to the West.
If we cease to acknowledge these retellings, we will forget the many reasons why the Ramayana is important, and forget how the story has travelled and the new forms it has taken. We will also discourage further retellings — and for the epic to remain alive and relevant to every generation, it must be re-told in a way that reflects the anxieties and issues of that society.
When our society finds the idea of multiple retellings offensive and preserves only one version, we silence inquiry into the epic, we put it on a pedestal. We cease to engage with it, its characters and their dilemmas.
It's in this polymorphous tradition that Ramanujan describes, in the many voices and languages of so many Ramayanas, that I find the best of India — a place of many voices, opinions, cultures, faiths and languages.
(Samhita Arni is a Bangalore-based author)
The Many True Kandas
Samhita Arni
Oct 23 2011, 03:30 hrs New Delhi:
The Ramayaana is a continuing, many-sided conversation between cultures and religions. By scrapping AK Ramanujan’s essay from its syllabus, can Delhi University ignore that exchange?
Last fortnight, Delhi University decided to remove AK Ramanujan's essay Three Hundred Ramayanas: Five Examples and Three Thoughts on Translation from its history syllabus, perhaps in response to earlier protests in 2008 over the inclusion of this essay. The decision scares me for many reasons, partly because it suggests that a viewpoint is beginning to prevail which perpetuates the notion of the Ramayana as exclusive, Hindu property, and ignores the fact that the Ramayana has been re-told — and is still being re-told — by Muslims, Buddhists, Jains and people of other faiths.
My own life bears this out. As a child who accompanied a diplomat father on various overseas postings — Indonesia, Pakistan and Thailand — the one constant in all the cultures I spent my childhood in was the Ramayana. In Indonesia, a largely Muslim country, we watched Wayang Kulit, the shadow puppet theatre which has plays on stories from the Ramayana. In Pakistan, I was told as a five-year-old that “Lahore” came from Lavapuri, from a legend that Lahore was founded by Ram's son Lava. In Chennai, my birthplace and the city my mother comes from, stories are still told of the founder of the Dravidian movement, EV Ramasamy Naicker, Periyar, who wrote a banned version of the Ramayana casting Ravana as a tragic hero, and, in an inversion of what happens at Dussehra, gathered hordes on the beach to burn images of Ram. In Thailand, one finds the Ramayana in many places, in the names of its kings, in Ayutthaya city (from Ayodhya), and in a beautiful poem inscribed on the walls of a wat (monastery), in which Ravana declares his undying love for Sita. Further afield, traces of the Ramayana linger in Angkor Wat in Buddhist Cambodia and Laos (like Lahore, also supposedly named after Lava.)
And yet, the Ramayana that is in ascendance in the popular imagination —the one repeated to me by my Hindu family — was stripped of all these delightful cadences and associations. From a story inhabited with magic, sorcerers, demons, talking animals and flying monkeys, it shrunk to a hagiography, a story about an ideal man/God, and his ideal wife. It was a story that prescribed roles for men and women, and was told in such a way that it failed to grasp my imagination as a child.
What could a girl — encouraged to think and question, to want and aspire for more than her mother and grandmother had ever had — admire in the silent, suffering, self-sacrificing Sita of popular imagination?
Five years ago, I rediscovered the Ramayana. I returned to India after almost a decade abroad, and I found a country where the Ramayana is still frequently referred to. (The references still amaze me. Recently, the Supreme Court mentioned the Lakshman rekha in the 2G case. In a school debate which I recently judged, the term Ram Rajya made a frequent appearance. A reality show on a Kannada channel named a line that participants could not cross the Lakshman rekha.) Moreover, the Ramayana was, and still is, a part of discussions about Indian identity and the state.
When I delved into the Ramayana as an adult, I was surprised by what I found.
I was astonished to discover in one version that Janaka found Sita, as a child, playing with Shiva's bow, and watched her lift it. Hence, he devised the test for her Swayamvara: for if Sita could lift the bow as a child, the man who would marry her, must, at least, be able to string the bow. This Sita was physically strong.
Reading Arshia Sattar's masterful translation of Valmiki's Ramayana, I discovered that Valmiki's Sita is one who says that dharma is sukusma — subtle and intangible. This Sita advises Ram, in the forest, to give up his weapons for the duration of exile and live a life in keeping with the peaceful, non-material dharma of the forest and Vanaprastha. This Sita was wise.
I became fascinated by the Ramayana and it's multiplicity of retelling. (This fascination has led to two books — a speculative fiction thriller that's due out next year, and a graphic novel Sita's Ramayana with Patua artist Moyna Chitrakar.)
In the process of creating a text to accompany Moyna's artwork, I explored the folk traditions, where women, singing in Sita's voice, expressed their own problems while describing her suffering. In her voice, they express their own lives.
The Ramayana has been re-told, recast many, many times. This polymorphous tradition is precisely what AK Ramanujan's essay explores. Here is Ramanujan's account of my favorite anecdote:
“To some extent all later Ramayanas play on the knowledge of previous tellings: they are meta-Ramayanas. I cannot resist repeating my favourite example. In several of the later Ramayanas (such as the Adhyatma Ramayana, 16th C.), when Rama is exiled, he does not want Sita to go with him into the forest. Sita argues with him. At first she uses the usual arguments: she is his wife, she should share his sufferings, exile herself in his exile, and so on. When he still resists the idea, she is furious. She bursts out, ‘Countless Ramayanas have been composed before this. Do you know of one where Sita doesn’t go with Rama to the forest?’ That clinches the argument, and she goes with him."
What emerges from Ramanujan's essay is not just that the Ramayana is a polymorphous tradition. It's also a many-sided conversation, that spans cultures, languages, centuries and religions. There are Buddhist and Jain versions of the Ramayana. (The Patuas, the itinerant storytelling tribe to which Moyna belongs, are a mixture of Muslims, Buddhists and Hindus, who all retell the Ramayana.)
Retelling the Ramayana has been a subversive act, a political act. Molla, a Telegu poetess and a potter's daughter, retold the Ramayana in simple language (in contrast to the ornate, difficult language that Brahmins used) and thus made it accessible to everyone. The Kannada writer Kuvempu, a Ram bhakt, struggled with the treatment of Shambukha (the shudra who Ram beheads in the Uttara Kanda for performing tapasya, which causes the death of a Brahmin's son) and wrote Shudra Tapasvi, which inverts the episode. Michael Madusudhan Dutt pioneered the use of blank verse in Bengali literature in the Meghnad Badh Kabya, a poem on Ravana's son Meghnad (aka Indrajit).
I've been to shadow puppet performances, and watched audiences laugh uproariously at shows that interpolate references to contemporary events (and characters from the Arabian Nights). Scholars speculate that the story of Hanuman, traveling on the Silk Route centuries ago, inspired the tales of the Monkey God, Sun Wukong, the hero of the 16th century Chinese epic Journey to the West.
If we cease to acknowledge these retellings, we will forget the many reasons why the Ramayana is important, and forget how the story has travelled and the new forms it has taken. We will also discourage further retellings — and for the epic to remain alive and relevant to every generation, it must be re-told in a way that reflects the anxieties and issues of that society.
When our society finds the idea of multiple retellings offensive and preserves only one version, we silence inquiry into the epic, we put it on a pedestal. We cease to engage with it, its characters and their dilemmas.
It's in this polymorphous tradition that Ramanujan describes, in the many voices and languages of so many Ramayanas, that I find the best of India — a place of many voices, opinions, cultures, faiths and languages.
(Samhita Arni is a Bangalore-based author)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
