HINDU CHAUVINISM

Vir Sanghvi on Semitisation of Hinduism

M.F. Husain's paintings are not obscene nudity is not the same as vulgarity and are unlikely to cause offence to anybody except perhaps for those VHP/ Shiv Sena members who believe that the approved dress code for heaven is khaki knickers.

I object to what the Shiv Sena and the Sangh Parivar are doing not because I am a liberal but because I am a Hindu.

In some dep, almost subconscious sense, we Hindus regard ourselves as being followers of the world's greatest religion. It is not just that Hinduism predates Christianity by thousands of years (and Christianity predates Islam) or that is essential themes of the primacy of the soul and the universality of creation are far more complex.

It is more that Hindum despite such medieval developments as these system remains an individualistic religion. We are content to let each other be. There is no crusading church, there are no mad mullahs, and there is no historical clergy to lay down the law. Our beliefs are peal hot congregational. With the individual approach certain kind of tolerance.

Six years ago, Dr………… Singh described the organised hysteria of the Babri masjid movement an example of the seminisation of Hinduism. It is one of the lasting ironies of ………...of Hinduism. It is many of those who Hinduism is not more Singh described the bari one of many of those who ……...  Islam regret only that Hinduism is not more………………………. itself.

There is a reason a clergy or a church, organisation organised religion, with itself more to political organisations.

Hinduism .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................[Editor’s Note: Unreadable text from original source. Full transcript coming soon.]........................................................................................................................................................................................................................

 Many Hindus reacted to The Satanic Verses agitation by saying, "Oh god! Those fanatical Muslims are at it again". The patronising response was occasioned by the certainty that Hindus would never behave in this manner.

Similarly, when Ayatollah Khomeini issued his fatwa against Salman Rushdie or when Taslima Nasreen had to flee Bangladesh, Hindus clucked their tongues superiorly. In India, they said, Hindus would never use the power of the state to impose religious judgement on other people.

The biggest miscalculation by the BJP has been its belief that everybody who regarded the Babari Masjid as a symbol of pseudo-secularism or minority appeasement would rejoice when it was pulled down.

In fact, Hindus reacted with revulsion, shame and horror. The destruction of other people's idols or places of worship has never been part of the Hindu tradition. There are no crusades in our history, no kings who want to be known as the Idol Breaker. The BJP's understanding of Hinduism far moved from the reality. And it has taken the party years to recover. 

The Shiv Sena and the Sangh Parivar are now repeating that mistake. Hindus are not offended by the notion that their gods and goddesses might sometimes be portrayed nude.

Muslims used as justification, Rushdie's statement that he was trying to shock. Husain has never tried to give religious offence.

The Rushdie and Nasreen affairs were seen by Muslims as intra-Islam matters. The Shiv Sena are using an alleged offence to Hindu sensibilities to persecute a Muslim. What could be more medieval? And finally (is being) misused. The power of the state to persecute non-Hindus in the name of (Hinduism).

The real problem is principles of Hinduism years of tradition. And demeaned. that it also goes against the Tramples over thousands of makes every Hindu feel small.

(The Sunday, 20-26 October, 1996)

Shahabuddin’s Letter to The Sunday, 11 November, 1996

I appreciate

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...................................................................................... [Editor’s Note: Unreadable text from original source. Full transcript coming soon.] ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

assimilation.

 Historically, you ignore the violent conflicts between Shaivism and Vaishnavnism, between the Buddhists and the Hindus, between the Jains and the Hindus and in this century between the Hindus and the Muslims, for which both share the blame.

In our age and time there are efforts, as Karan Singh and before him Morarji Desai pointed out, Hindus have been "progressing" towards adoption of a set of dogmas to define Hinduism, the establishment of a Church (Sant) Sansad), its own set of 'Mad Mullahs' (the assorted Sadhus, Sants and Shankarachayas who have been fielded by the Sangh Parivar, including the VHP) and a hysterical clergy" who have not only laid down the law in Ayodhya but even written a new Constitution for the country. If imitation is the best form of flattery, surely the neo-Hindus are suffering not from a superiority complex as you seem to be but from a deep-seated inferiority complex!

Personally speaking. I believe that every conscious individual has the right to choose his religion (not necessarily the one he is born into for that was not a choice) and freely profess practise and preach it, without showing any disrespect to any other religion and, what is more important, without discriminating against the followers of the others, in his personal or social life or in his functional role as a wielder of the power and authority of the state, be he a beat constable or a Minister.

The collective rights of a community are above the rights of an artist. All Muslims who want to be known as progressive or secular are the community's worst enemies.

-Iqbal Masud on Mushirul Hasan Case