Why M F Hussain Offends

 

Why M F Hussain Offends

The article was originally posted on January 26, 2013 and is being reproduced without any update.

This article is being written in response to certain questions raised at a social networking site. The principal question was why Hindus find certain paintings of M F Hussain (MFH) offensive. The paintings under consideration depict various Hindu deities in the nude. Further, the inquiry asked for a justification for this feeling of being offended in the background of sexually explicit sculptures in certain Hindu temples and Sanskrit erotic literature.

Setting the Context

Before these issues are addressed it is necessary to set the context clearly so that there is no dilution or diversion of the discussion. Artistic freedom is not the issue that is being discussed. Every artist has the right to freedom of expression as long as he or she is not violating the law of the land. Certain paintings can justifiably cause offence to a section of the viewers, even if they are very obviously within the ambit of the law.

 

Before getting involved with paintings of MFH, it is also essential to understand in general terms what in a painting can be offensive to a group of viewers. Sometimes images, icons or symbols depicted in a painting represent persons or objects held in reverence or admiration by the group. If the painting misrepresents what these images actually stand for and denigrate the persons or objects depicted then they will cause offence. Here a couple of clarifications are in order. The finished painting is the complete product for the viewer group. The viewer group is not concerned with what clarifications the painter may have externally issued, nor is it concerned with how the critics have evaluated the painting. The viewer group is only concerned with the response that the finished painting invokes in a majority of the group members. The viewer group is also not concerned with the intent of the painter, in the sense that whether the painter intentionally desired to offend the viewers or not. The viewers can belong to the public domain without knowledge of academic matters in art evaluation. Absence of academic knowledge cannot rule out the viewer from being a bona fide one. Hence the crucial question is whether there is reasonable justification for a homogenous group of viewers to perceive the paintings as denigrating those it holds in esteem or reverence.

Hanuman in Flight

It would be counterproductive to discuss the issue taking the said paintings of MFH collectively. Each painting is unique and can have different reasons for being offensive.  Therefore, this article selects one representative painting from the lot for analysis. Other paintings of MFH can be analyzed in a similar manner to assess whether they are justifiably offensive to Hindus, and if so to what extent.

 

The painting being selected is titled Hanuman in Flight. The painting has been sourced from the Internet. It is being reproduced below for ready reference. The painting bears the signature of MFH and this is being taken as evidence of it being a genuine work of MFH.

 

 

Hanuman, Rama, and Sita

The status of Hanuman in Hinduism is well established. Given the title and that Hanuman is a vanar, one can reasonably conclude that the monkey in the center of the picture is a depiction of Hanuman. Hanuman has several attributes, but two are relevant to this discussion. The first is that he was an avowed celibate or brahmachari, which means that he eschewed sexual contact of any kind. Yet in this painting MFH has depicted him between two explicitly naked human figures, one a man and the other a woman. To Hindus this would be a derision of Hanuman’s celibacy. MFH has shown no justification for juxtaposing naked figures alongside Hanuman. There is no evidence from the scriptures, mythology or folklore that Hanuman encountered such naked persons. In the absence of any rationale for the naked figures, it is understandable for Hindus to be justifiably offended by the painting, which beyond doubt misrepresents the celibacy of Hanuman.

 

The question that automatically arises is whether these two nude figures represent any nudes or specific personages. It is here that the second attribute of Hanuman becomes important. Hanuman was an ardent devotee of Rama and Sita. Whenever he has been depicted in painting or sculpture with a couple, that couple has been Rama and Sita.  One of the most iconic representations of Hanuman in Hinduism is of his tearing open his chest to reveal Rama and Sita in his heart. MFH has himself depicted this in one of his paintings. In the absence of any other explanation, it would be normal and justifiable to perceive the nude couple in this MFH painting as Rama and Sita. If seeing Hanuman with naked figures would be offensive, then the feeling of being offended would be compounded manifold when the naked figures are Rama and Sita, whom Hanuman revered as his Lord and Mother respectively.

 

Naked figures of Rama and Sita, particularly Sita, would directly offend Hindu sensibilities as well. And there is justification for this. Hindus worship Sita as the paragon of fidelity and to see her depicted in the nude will hurt. And to add insult to injury, the depiction in the MFH painting is crass and provocative. It can be argued that in so many years of marriage Rama and Sita must have had their moments of intimacy. But the fact remains that no credible narration of Ramayana depicts any moment of intimacy in this explicit manner and any such intimacy is not crucial in the events in the Ramayana. And do not forget that Hanuman is present in the painting, which in fact is named after him, and this puts an end to any argument of personal intimacy. Therefore, on several counts, icons have been misrepresented and the feeling of being offended is more than justified.

 
In the Context of Erotic Literature and Sculpture

The issue of erotic sculpture and literature must be addressed. Again, one cannot deal in generalities. This painting depicts Hanuman, Rama and Sita and therefore it is essential that the depiction of these three characters in sculpture and literature be examined. There are temples with sexually explicit sculptures. Most of these sculptures portray the normal humans. Some of them would also portray deities and events from Hindu mythologies. However, no such sexually explicit depiction of Hanuman, Rama and Sita has been generally reported. One cannot justify depiction of a particular deity in a particular manner simply because some other deity has been depicted in that manner. As explained earlier, each deity has his or her individual characteristics and attributes and mythologies.

 

Again, while discussing Sanskrit literature one has to look at specifics. The passage that immediately comes to mind is Ravana’s description of Sita in Valmiki Ramayana, in which her figure has been explicitly described and praised. This is a reflection of the lustful desire of Ravana. The MFH painting in question is in a different setting. To use this passage or others like this to justify a naked a depiction of Sita totally out of context cannot be considered reasonable by any stretch of imagination. The fact remains that there is no basis whatsoever for the painting and it misrepresents the attributes that Hindus hold in Hanuman, Rama and Sita. It is natural for these misrepresentations to offend Hindus.

 
The Way to Respond

In conclusion, a discussion on how the offended Hindus should react is in order. The best option by far is to ignore such provocations. If one has faith in one’s religion then such misrepresentations, whether malicious or unintended, should not become a disturbing element. If at all some reaction is warranted then that has to be within the ambit of law. Several lawful options are available. Threatening and inciting violence is a symptom of immaturity and just because groups from other religions have resorted to it in the past, it does not mean that the Hindus should follow suit. If the offended Hindus do not respond or respond in a mild manner, it does not imply that there is no offensiveness in the painting. That exists independent of the response adopted.

To Shree Pavan K Varma

 

Pavan K Varma has always come across as a learned, logical, and unbiased person, so I was surprised to listen to his views on a TV program Ram Beyond Rajniti. Events around the Rama Mandir Prana Pratishtha run round the clock now. This show was on The Newshour Special Edition on the Times Now Channel hosted by Navika Kumar. The others on the panel were equally erudite, but the focus of this blog is Pavan Varma.

Pavanji wears many hats, but I know him as the author of books like Krishna The Playful Divine, The Great Hindu Civilisation, and The Greatest Ode to Lord Ram: Tulsidas’s Ramcharitmanas. His reverence for Hinduism and his admiration for Bharat’s civilisational heritage clearly shows. Therefore, it was surprising to listen him making inane arguments bashing the BJP. Well, may not be so surprising because everyone outside the BJP seems to be doing it today.

To be fair to Pavan Varma, he began by appreciating the contribution made by BJP in the fructification of the grand temple at Rama Janmabhoomi in Ayodhya. But he went on to say that the BJP has weaponised Shree Rama against other religions and the opposition parties, which according to Pavanji was not warranted. He cites Shree Rama’s character and his message in defence of his opinion.

Pavan Varma refers to two bhajans by Tulsidasji to support that Rama was an epitome of compassion. Bhaya prakat krupala (then the compassionate one appeared) and Shree Ramachandra krupalu bhaja mana (Mind, contemplate on Shree Ramachandra, the compassionate one). The advice is that compassionate persons are tolerant and understanding of the needs of others and therefore Hindus should behave in this manner in their interactions with others. Since the alleged behaviour of BJP is not in consonance with this compassion, they are not “true” Hindus.

There is a time for compassion and a time for aggression and Shree Rama had both aspects to his character. Here are two incidents that Tulsidasji incorporates in The Ramcharitmanas.

·       When Rama sees the armies of the demons Khara and Dushana approaching Panchvati: dekhi Rama ripudal chali aawaa, bihasi kathin kodund chadhava (when Rama saw the enemy horde approaching, he smiled and strung his fearsome bow).

·       When prayers to Varundeva failed: Lacchiman bana sarasana aanu, soshoun baridhi bisikha krusanu (Laxman fetch my bow and arrows and I will dry up the ocean with a fiery missile). Rama continues educating Laxman: Supplication before an idiot, friendship with a rogue, inculcating liberality on a born miser, talking wisdom to one steeped in worldliness, glorifying dispassion before a man of excessive greed, and a lecture on mind control to an irascible man are as futile as sowing seeds in a barren land.

 

Every Indian will be aware that when Ravana abducted Sita and refused to return her, Shree Rama did not show compassion and he did not accept defeat. Before the year was complete, Ravana and his entire family was killed and Lanka destroyed. The Hindus have waited 500 years to justifiably reclaim what is theirs. They have shown more compassion than needed.

 

 

Pavan Varma argued that the message of Shree Rama enjoins people to live in peace, harmony, and brotherhood, keeping the interest of others before the self, He again cited lines from the Ramcharitmanas. Parhit saris dharma nahin bhai, par pida sam nahin adharmai (there is no greater righteousness than working for the benefit of others and no greater unrighteousness than causing pain to others). This works only when all involved espouse the philosophy as another line describing Rama Rajya cited by Pavanji elucidates: Sab nar karahi paraspar preeti. The key word here is paraspar, which indicates mutuality and reciprocity. This responsibility lies equally on the other, but in practice it has never been so.

 

In an interview with Arnab Goswami on Republic TV, S Gurumurthy explained that for the last 75 years Hindus have been taught that tolerance is their virtue even when it leads to subjugation and giving up what is rightfully theirs. This is obviously a fake narrative successfully peddled through Macaulayan education. The Bhagvad Gita, the holiest of Hindu scriptures, clearly denounces this position in which Shree Krishna exhorts Arjuna to take up arms when the Pandava kingdom has been usurped and they have been denied even a request for five villages in lieu of their kingdom.

 

Many panellists on TV shows indulge in cherry picking, usually out of context, to try prop up untenable positions. Pavanji, a person of your learning and stature should not indulge in this. Also, it is no longer tenable to ride two horses. One cannot support the Hindu move to reclaim its civilisation and at the same time support minority appeasement, which is rising to dangerous levels and now directly challenges the Hindu way of life.

The Rama Mandir Is A Done Deal – Now To Kashi And Mathura

 The Rama Mandir in Ayodhya is as good as a done deal. I use “as good as” only because I do not want to challenge Destiny. Before moving on to Kashi and Mathura, I want to refer to the politics being played by all concerned over various issues related to the Prana Pratishtha. Politicking over anything and everything will now be a way of life in India, not only till the general elections of 2024 but for a long time to come.

The question on everybody’s mind now is will the Kashi Viswanath Temple and the Mathura Krishna Janmabhoomi Temple be reclaimed sooner rather than later. Expectations amongst the Hindu devotees are that this should and will happen sooner. And there are valid reasons for this euphoria.

·       There were many stumbling blocks on the way to the erection of the grand temple on the Rama Janmabhoomi. These have been understood and the correct processes to overcome them have been found. Precedents have been established. The path to Kashi and Mathura has become easier.

·       Advocate Vishnu Jain and others have already set the ball rolling and are receiving favourable responses from the courts, including the Supreme Court of India.

·       It was believed by the opponents of this movement that The Places of Worship Act, 1991, would prevent any progress towards reclaiming Kashi and Mathura. The belief was erroneous. Though it is desirable that the discriminatory act be repealed, it is evident that the existence of the act will not prevent the legal processes.

·       The mood of the Hindu majority is upbeat. They are no longer willing to sacrifice their ancient civilizational heritage at the altars of pseudo-secularism or minority appeasement. The ruling Bhartiya Janata Party is fully aware of this sentiment and is exploiting it to the fullest. Every anti-Hindu invective uttered by the political opposition makes the call for reclaiming Hindu temples even stronger.

·       Hindus yearning for rectification of historical oppression have found new voice on social media platforms. Support from historians like Vikram Sampath and advocates like J Sai Deepak is viral on YouTube.

However, there is one huge difference between Ayodhya and Kashi-Mathura. The “Babri” structure was never a live mosque and it had already been razed to the ground in 1992. The mosques within the Gyana Vapi Kashi and Krishna Janmabhoomi Mathura complexes are standing structures that are being used for worship by Muslims. Will the Supreme Court, and the matters will ultimately reach there, have the courage to issue an order for the destruction or otherwise removal of these edifices so that temples can be built there to complement the grandness of the one at Ayodhya. If the push comes to shove, will the Parliament enact laws to remove the mosques and clear the land for the temples, even if the Bhartiya Janata Party ends up with a much bigger majority in the 2024 general elections.

I, for one, will not hazard a guess. Whether the Hindus can climb this slippery slope only Destiny will reveal at the appropriate time.  

 

Do Not Block that Road

Come hell or high water no one has the right to block the national highway from Jammu to Srinagar through the Pir Panjal Range.

You can block the road from Jaipur to Delhi because there are alternative land routes available. But this is the one and only route from the rest of India into the Kashmir valley and beyond. The consequences of blockading the route are disastrous. Humanitarian supplies have been cut off. The economy of the Valley has been put on a standstill. The army outposts and Ladakh have to be stocked for winter before the road accesses to those places close down. This blockade can result in short provisions in those areas for the long winter.

I do not know how many are aware that till this highway was built the only way to the Kashmir valley was through Pakistan. After Jammu and Kashmir ceded to India Jawaharlal Nehru had this highway built on war footing. It was one of the few good things that he has done. It is on the strength of this highway that we have been able to retain Jammu and Kashmir. This highway is worth its weight in gold.

It is true that the PDP created this controversy for their electoral gains by mounting an agitation to get the court order revoked. In order to win brownie points the PDP played football with the Amarnath Shrine Board and the sentiments of the Hindus. There was nothing so pressing about the issue that it had to be handled before the elections in Kashmir. If they felt strongly about it they should have included it in their manifesto and fought the elections on it. The elections were only a few months away. It is true that the Congress fiddled while Rome burnt. Only it was India that was burning and not Rome. The Congress, like Charlie Brown, believes that no problem is so big that one cannot run away from it. Only problems do not run away. Therefore the country has a right to be aggrieved at the petty drama that was played out between the PDP and the Congress and most of all the Shrine board that was used as a pawn.

The BJP jumped into the bandwagon for its own electoral gains. In this issue, as in the Rama Setu issue, they saw an opportunity to tell the Hindus of India that they are in danger if the Congress comes back to power. I do not agree with the ‘Hindutva’ fraternity jumping into the bandwagon this way because I honestly believe that this is counterproductive. But I respect their right to make their own political decisions. I looked with sadness at the rising ante in the game of poker politics but I kept quiet. Because if one political party behaves irresponsibly then the others have to follow to maintain their political space.

So do what you have to, but for Rama’s sake do not block that road.

The Congress’ Obsession with Loyalty

At a public function in the presence of the Prime Minister, Arjun Singh said that today the Congress Party is evaluating loyalty in a very limited context. He hastened to add that the Nehru-Gandhi family is fully capable of judging loyalty, implying that the Prime Minister is not.

The Congress Party has always been obsessed with loyalty. To the party loyalty is a greater virtue than capability. And to the Nehru-Gandhi family loyalty has meant loyalty to the family and not to the party. The reason for the pitiful state of the part today is that it has not been able to differentiate between loyalty and merit and between the party and the family. This is the reason why a person like Arjun Singh heads the HRD Ministry in a country of a billion people. This is the reason why today we have the most lackluster Home Minister of independent India, under whose regime there has been a resurgence of violence in the North East and from Naxalites. This is the reason that Narsimha Rao, one of the better Prime Ministers we have had, was not given a second term by the Congress High Command after having a successful first term. Apparently Rahul Gandhi is no different from his predecessors in this respect. Recently Congress MP Akhilesh Das resigned from the party because the coterie surrounding Rahul Gandhi was destroying the party in Uttar Pradesh.

Unfortunately this is the fate of all political parties. The top leadership everywhere is surrounding itself with loyalists in order to safeguard its position. Seekho India Seekho.

Ms. Shobhaa De: From Incredible to Unstoppable

Browsing in The Strand Bookstall yesterday I saw Ms De’s latest staring down from the prime display location. Ms. De on the cover was at her dazzling best, but then when is she not. I was tempted to make an immediate purchase but I had half a dozen unread books lying at home so I reluctantly placed the book back onto the shelf.

I know a little bit about Ms. De from her writings. She is unashamedly proud of India’s past and unashamedly optimistic about India’s future. I cannot think of a person who epitomizes contemporary India better. Whatever Superstar India: From Incredible to Unstoppable is, it will certainly be straight from her heart.

Ms. De sprung to fame as the editor of Stardust and turned film journalism on its head. The first issue featuring Rajesh Khanna on its cover, labeled as the ‘phenomenon’ is something few will forget. Later she began writing novels. I haven’t read any only because by then I had stopped reading contemporary fiction. But I remember that the novels were recommended as supplementary reading by Oxford University (or was it Cambridge?). And I also remember one pitifully misguided comment in the press that it was perhaps to teach people how not to write. Why cannot we revel in the successes of our fellow humans? I have read quite a few of Ms, De’s newspaper columns. Her observations are sharp and her arguments sound. I remember a recent one in which she expressed admiration for Mayawati’s success in the Uttar Pradesh Assembly polls. I do not know whether she subscribes to Mayawati’s political philosophy, but Ms. De drove home the point that admiration for the achievement is independent of admiration for the achiever. One book of Ms. De’s I have read and that is Spouses. It is an extremely imaginative concept in that it describes the joys and tribulations of marriage in general through the joys and tribulations of her marriage. The only more candid self-exposition I have read is in Shri Harivanshraiji Bachchan’s autobiography. And finally I cannot forget her on Coffee with Karan, sorry make that Koffee with Karan. One thing we have in common is a liking to see movies in cinema halls with popcorn for company.

So I will read Superstar India: From Incredible to Unstoppable, either after I finish the unread books lying at home or more likely when I give in to the temptation of by-passing the queue.

The Women’s Reservation Bill

Yesterday the Women’s Reservation Bill was finally tabled in the Rajya Sabha with much “nautanki”. I cannot think of any word in English that conveys the exact sense of this word. In fact over the last decade this bill has unfortunately become something of a joke. No political party wants this bill passed, with the possible exception of the Communists, yet every party wants to put up a front of supporting it in some way or the other. If the Congress was really serious why did it have to wait till the end of its five-year term before tabling the bill?

This nautanki (there can be no other word for it) reminds me of an episode from the famous television series Yes Minister. Jim Hacker MP, succeeds in getting reservation for women, not in the parliament, but in the upper echelons of the civil service. And he wants to promote a junior female officer to a senior post under this policy. But the woman hands in her reservation instead. She does not want to be part of a quota. She has obtained a job as a CEO in the private sector on her own merit.

So on a more serious note: should there be reservation for women? Ideally there should not be. Since women comprise 50% of the population they should get 50% of the seats on merit without reservation. Are the women capable of getting 50% seats on their own without reservation? Yes they are. Then why are there so few women as elected representatives? This is because the male chauvinistic leadership of political parties does not give them tickets on the untenable pretext that women in general do not have the capacity of winning elections if pitted against men. Therefore reservations are required so that women can be pitted against women.

So why is the Women’s Reservation Bill being held up. The answer is that the men do not want to concede 33% of the space to women. As it is there is not enough space for all the men and many have to be left dissatisfied and these dissatisfied men can create quite a ruckus. If the space for men is reduced further then imagine the headaches for the party top bosses. But this is not the reason being offered.

The reason most commonly being given is that within the reservation for women there should be reservation for women of backward classes and minorities. There is merit in this argument and the solution is simple. If there are 150 seats reserved for backward classes and minorities, then 100 of these should be in the open category and 50 in the women category. But the messiahs of the backward classes and minorities do not want this. They want to keep the existing reservations for the backward classes and minorities intact and secure further reservation for women, a concept that is neither fair nor tenable.

Therefore the nautanki continues and the male politicians are having a good laugh.