Penguin India has finally decided to withdraw the book Hindus: An Alternative History. This has given relief to several Hindus and at the same time provided ammunition to media persons and the so called clan of liberals to attack the Hindu Society on grounds of intolerance and media censorship. Naturally, living in a highly media sensitive world and exposed to the very vehement opinions on freedom and its various avatars in all fields of social life, one would wonder as to whether or not, it is a mistake to block the book's publication. It cannot be expected of the Mainstream Paid Media which thrives on Hindu denigration to voice the opinions of those who understand why this flimsy and misplaced work required to be thwarted. However our generation is luckier than our parents' or grandparents' in having the social media to dispense opinions and therefore we must exploit this advantage to regain lost footing. Let us tackle this case from the eyes of a Hindutva Ideologist. I must add that my fairness will make up for my lack of politeness (perceived).
Indian penal code, section 295, says: “Whoever, with deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of any class of 6[ citizens of India], 7[ by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise] insults or attempts to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of that class, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 8[ three years], or with fine, or with both.” This is the legislation invoked to ban the publication of the book in question. This law has been previously used to ban Salman Rushdie's Satanic Verses, Taslima Nasrin's Lajja and Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code.
The book violates religious sentiments of Hindus, that much is certain. As per the legal language what remains to be established is whether or not the attempt was deliberate. If it was deliberate then banning the book was technically correct. To put things in perspective let us study the profile of Wendy Doniger. She is an American Indologist who is well known for suggesting that the Hindu practices are more or less ritualised sex and sex worship. The most striking example of this is the fact that she received a PhD from Harvard University in June 1968, with a dissertation on 'Asceticism and Sexuality in the Mythology of Siva,' supervised by Daniel H.H. Ingalls, Sr.. Her credentials, overall, point out to the fact that her understanding of Hinduism and its customs is very narrow. This is to be expected. Every artist, author or poet has a signature. This signature is affected by the time and environment in which they were born and brought up and work. Miss Doniger's signature is one of fanatic sensualism and eroticism. Everything is judged through the inadequate lens of sexuality and possible carnal connotations. This of course has advantages. Such an approach is always bound to attract censorship from the prudish and highly conservative people that hold high offices in most religious institutions. While Hinduism is not a religion its persecution has caused it to acquire such institutions as are neither required nor are helpful for being a Hindu. As a matter of fact the understanding of most such gurus etc is as limited as Wendy Doniger in matters pertaining to Hindu philosophy. Obviously rebels always get the sympathy vote and major chunks of well-meaning but ill-informed population pitches their weight in favor of one villain to outdo another.
The irony begins when the Hindu Society's greatest strength is subverted and manipulated and made into its weakness. Its pluralism and openness. A culture and civilization which is almost, by modern estimates, eight thousand years old, finds its antiquity challenged and reduced to simply sex and animalistic drives far removed from their understanding or the possible pursuits of spirituality. There is also the angle of superimposition. People like Miss Doniger belong to the cult that actually believes this to be the only possible meaning of life. Obviously, in such cases their attempts are to seek support from the oldest civilisation, no matter what it takes. The result is misinterpretation of texts and portrayal of philosophies in a manner which is either partial or false. Coming back to her work in question, she has sought to present all of Hinduism's worship and rituals in the background of sexuality. Such a description is all too common regarding Hinduism although it is at odds with all of Hindu texts and philosophical tenets. A simple test would be to tell a worshiper that the Siva Lingam is actually a penis and note their reaction. While it may be argued that the modern Hindu is victim to the anti-sexual propaganda, there is no evidence to substantiate that in either Hindu history or spiritual discourse. Doniger has also argued that ancient Hindus had recognised sex as a driving force for all existence. She uses it to justify all types of absurd claims and hardly backs them with legitimate sources, choosing to selectively cite works by contemporary Buddhists and Islamists. Besides her claim is half true and half false. Hindus had indeed noted that the desire to have off-spring was the driving force in the endeavours of all creation. She however conveniently decides to ignore the same texts when they state that the ultimate aim of Human life is to seek moksha and in that approach all such worldly desires are a source of constant distraction. However it is possible to submit to them temporarily and then let go and pursue moksha. This forms the basis of the ashram vyavastha. These aspects have been determinedly downplayed. Her other great folly and one which seals her status as anti-Hindu is the zeal with which she has repeatedly understated atrocities of Islamic invaders of India, at times giving them a better certificate than what even they, as per their court historians, would be willing to take. As a matter of fact the court case filed against her included several factual errors which have been established beyond doubt, pertaining to dates and actions. Of course, eager to play the victim card, there has been no mention of that. That, in her criticism of the ban, she chose to describe it as a Hindu law when it belongs to their favorite category of 'secular' just serves to reinforce that her work was intended to take the shorter but well-trodden path to fame, that of controversy.
In spite of being a free media proponent I feel that the ban was well-deserved. Hinduism has lost the level playing field in the game of religions, ,mainly because it has never sought to compete but to accommodate. It has survived through periods of unchecked and cruel fanaticism through sheer resilience and diversity. Since the sword has failed, the pen which is mightier than the sword has now been employed against us. Centuries of oppression and poverty have deprived the Hindus of strength in this department as well. Most Hindus are ignorant and uneducated about Hinduism and practice its traditions whereas Hinduism was supposed to be free of tradition. The real spirituality and ideas are either lost in the pages of the Vedas or with a select few scholars who mostly study rather than teach. The result is that such malicious works as Doniger's gain undue importance and become basis for argument in social life which further weakens Hindu self-esteem. It also does not help that properly written works neither generate enough controversy nor are advertised by the paid media of India. All in all I see the ban giving back the level playing field to us by punishing a very frivolous and motivated work. The only downside is that Doniger most probably wanted it to be this way and I am wary that we may have played into her hands. Still that does not take away that this book was certainly not our history. It was more like the propaganda that is often spouted by the most motivated enemies of Hindu identity and its assertion.
No comments:
Post a Comment