[Reader-list] Ways of Life and Transgressions

Yousuf ysaeed7 at yahoo.com
Mon Sep 1 09:12:19 IST 2008 

Dear Rahul
I understand your logic, but I think your alternative no.3 is too idealized and utopian to achieve, although I would love if it works. Also, it may apply only to some situations, not all. For instance, if a group of people thinks that women are inferior and should remain inside homes, or that we should ruin the environment by cutting trees, wasting water and fuel, would you allow them to believe and act on this? You may call it my condescending attitude, but why is it that we have managed to bring an awareness and "reform" today about so many millions of issues in our society which people used to take with orthodox attitude. I am talking about gender equality, environment, education, health issues (although it is still not enough). Nobody is born with politically correct genes - we all acquire things as we grow. So what's the big deal for instance about having arts appreciation as part of the school curriculum or TV programmes. Should we allow our
 mainstream media to remain condescending then? Why is television changing the attitude of people - why is our society becoming more consumerist and aggressive and prejudiced? 
Look my condescending solution doesn't involve simply education - I am talking about dialogue and awareness, and not talking down somebody's throat which the TV does today.

Yousuf

--- On Sun, 8/31/08, Rahul Asthana <rahul_capri at yahoo.com> wrote:

> From: Rahul Asthana <rahul_capri at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Ways of Life and Transgressions
> To: "Shuddhabrata Sengupta" <shuddha at sarai.net>, ysaeed7 at yahoo.com
> Cc: "Sarai list" <reader-list at sarai.net>
> Date: Sunday, August 31, 2008, 11:54 PM
> Yousuf, 
> 
> I think i failed in getting my point across.No amount of
> "education" would make Hussein's art
> appreciated by some,and those who are offended by
> Hussein's art are no less "educated" than you
> or me.
> Unless you get rid of your condescension about educating
> people about what they should or shouldn't get offended
> by,any discussion about solution to conflicts like this is a
> non-starter.
> 
> I am going to make one last try though.
> 
> Say there are two groups A and B,with different value
> systems.A is offended by an act X and B is not,apparently
> due to their different value systems. B encourages X and
> this increases tensions in a society where A and B live
> together.Lets see what are the possible solutions.
> 
> 1.Both A and B tell each other to go take a hike and they
> would do according to how they feel fit. 
> 2.Both A and B are sure that their value systems are
> superior and they try to convert each other to their own
> view points through dialog etc.
> 3.Both A and B recognize that there are irreconcilable
> differences in their world views.They also recognize that
> they would respect the differences and try to honor them to
> the extent possible while also trying to achieve their own
> goals through whatever means possible.
> 
> If liberal fanatics like you will keep on engaging in
> #2,(which in my opinion is even worse than #1 because #1
> does not involve condescension) that you are doing right
> now,you will always enable religious fanatics from the other
> side who will try to convert you to their view point.Why is
> their stand less valid than yours? 
> If you engage in #3 ,you will enable moderates from the
> other side who will listen to you if you listen to them.
> The big leap of understanding that you need to make is that
> there can be two internally consistent value systems which
> will lead to opposing positions on many issues,and both
> these value systems are equally valid.
> 
> Regards
> Rahul
> 
> --- On Sun, 8/31/08, Yousuf <ysaeed7 at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > From: Yousuf <ysaeed7 at yahoo.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Ways of Life and
> Transgressions
> > To: "Shuddhabrata Sengupta"
> <shuddha at sarai.net>, rahul_capri at yahoo.com
> > Cc: "Sarai list"
> <reader-list at sarai.net>
> > Date: Sunday, August 31, 2008, 9:40 AM
> > When I mention education, I primarily include media in
> it.
> > But the media is careless and works only on the
> diktats of
> > industry and politicians. So the prime responsibility
> (of
> > making sure that their art is appreciated) falls on
> the arts
> > fraternity itself. At least until we find a better
> solution.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- On Sat, 8/30/08, Rahul Asthana
> > <rahul_capri at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > From: Rahul Asthana <rahul_capri at yahoo.com>
> > > Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Ways of Life and
> > Transgressions
> > > To: "Shuddhabrata Sengupta"
> > <shuddha at sarai.net>, ysaeed7 at yahoo.com
> > > Cc: "Sarai list"
> > <reader-list at sarai.net>
> > > Date: Saturday, August 30, 2008, 9:58 PM
> > > "They have not been educated to appreciate
> the
> > nuances
> > > of the medium or the message."
> > > Yousuf, I am sorry but that's
> condescending.By the
> > same
> > > token a religious person can say that the artist
> has
> > not
> > > been taught the nuances of religious
> sensibilities.My
> > point
> > > is that if two groups having different values
> have to
> > > coexist in a society,they have to be tolerant
> towards
> > each
> > > other.
> > > I do not advocate any limit to the freedom of
> > > expression,but there should not be complete
> > callousness
> > > towards the feelings of groups.Painters like
> Hussein
> > and
> > > other heretics would always keep producing works
> that
> > would
> > > offend,and perhaps thats necessary too;but if
> some of
> > the
> > > people in the media,and I do not mean the media
> which
> > > actually represents these groups, can understand
> and
> > voice
> > > their feelings,then emotions would probably not
> flare
> > up to
> > > that extent.
> > > That is the middle way.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- On Sat, 8/30/08, Yousuf
> <ysaeed7 at yahoo.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > > From: Yousuf <ysaeed7 at yahoo.com>
> > > > Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Ways of Life and
> > > Transgressions
> > > > To: "Shuddhabrata Sengupta"
> > > <shuddha at sarai.net>, rahul_capri at yahoo.com
> > > > Cc: "Sarai list"
> > > <reader-list at sarai.net>
> > > > Date: Saturday, August 30, 2008, 9:31 PM
> > > > Dear Rahul
> > > > I had difficulty following your first
> sentence
> > (and a
> > > few
> > > > others), but yes, to put it in simple
> language,
> > people
> > > have
> > > > been offended by Hussain's paintings,
> and
> > they are
> > > not
> > > > always at fault. They have not been educated
> to
> > > appreciate
> > > > the nuances of the medium or the message.
> And the
> > art
> > > > fraternity doesn't have the urge to go
> to the
> > > people and
> > > > explain what they do and why they do. The
> > politician
> > > of
> > > > course is too happy to cash in on the
> ignorance
> > of the
> > > > public. 
> > > > 
> > > > Incidentally, countless
> provocative/blasphemous
> > art or
> > > > statements have been made in the past but
> not all
> > of
> > > them
> > > > led to a public outcry. Almost all known
> cases
> > where a
> > > piece
> > > > of art/literature has led to violence, are
> those
> > where
> > > > somebody (or some political party) used them
> to
> > spread
> > > the
> > > > flames. In most cases, the protesters
> haven't
> > seen
> > > or
> > > > read what they have been protesting against.
> 
> > > > 
> > > > So, should the artists make such provocative
> > works
> > > only for
> > > > themselves or their closest friends, and
> never
> > allow
> > > them to
> > > > go public. Or should they (and their
> > institutions)
> > > create an
> > > > atmosphere of awareness where the public can
> > > appreciate
> > > > their art and not tear it apart? I don't
> find
> > a
> > > third
> > > > alternative.
> > > > 
> > > > Yousuf
> > > > 
> > > > --- On Sat, 8/30/08, Rahul Asthana
> > > > <rahul_capri at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > From: Rahul Asthana
> > <rahul_capri at yahoo.com>
> > > > > Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Ways of Life
> and
> > > > Transgressions
> > > > > To: ysaeed7 at yahoo.com,
> "Shuddhabrata
> > > > Sengupta" <shuddha at sarai.net>
> > > > > Cc: "Sarai list"
> > > > <reader-list at sarai.net>
> > > > > Date: Saturday, August 30, 2008, 8:42
> PM
> > > > > Dear Yousuf,
> > > > > 
> > > > > I think the classic liberal stand of
> > reductionist
> > > > > extrapolation,in which one develops
> certain
> > set
> > > of
> > > > canonical
> > > > > principles and expects them to govern
> all
> > > discourse on
> > > > a
> > > > > certain topic, is not necessarily
> > philosophically
> > > > incorrect
> > > > > from their point of view,but
> insufficient
> > and
> > > improper
> > > > if we
> > > > > want to live in a tolerant liberal
> society.I
> > will
> > > try
> > > > to
> > > > > elaborate:
> > > > > The point is not that Hussein as a
> Muslim
> > can
> > > paint
> > > > Hindu
> > > > > deities,nude or otherwise or whether
> his
> > > intention was
> > > > to
> > > > > insult,or not.The point is also not
> that the
> > his
> > > > paintings
> > > > > can be artistic and break new grounds
> of
> > > expression
> > > > > etc.Neither is it the point that he
> should
> > have
> > > the
> > > > freedom
> > > > > of expression to paint whatever he
> wants.The
> > > point is
> > > > also
> > > > > not that the people who attacked him
> were
> > wrong.
> > > > > 
> > > > > The point that I have been trying to
> make is
> > that
> > > all
> > > > the
> > > > > above things are true;but still a
> painting
> > that
> > > he has
> > > > made
> > > > > can be offensive to many people.Now,the
> > classic
> > > > reductionist
> > > > > line here is that,offense is
> > > subjective.Obviously,we
> > > > > can't be bothered about every
> person who
> > > takes
> > > > offense
> > > > > at any random stuff, can we?To that I
> would
> > say,
> > > using
> > > > our
> > > > > own personal judgment,depending upon
> our
> > > interactions
> > > > with
> > > > > people, we can make out most of the
> times 
> > if
> > > > something is
> > > > > truly offensive to a large group of
> people
> > or
> > > not.If
> > > > we
> > > > > can't,we should talk to
> people.IMHO,I
> > > don't
> > > > think I
> > > > > should take the easy way out of hiding
> > behind the
> > > > principles
> > > > > of freedom of expression and visual
> > metaphors
> > > etc.We
> > > > should
> > > > > always support freedom of
> expression,but if
> > we
> > > can
> > > > surmise
> > > > > that a particular act of art was
> done,when
> > it was
> > > > probably
> > > > > apparent that it would hurt the
> > sensibilities of
> > > a
> > > > large
> > > > > group of people,we should call it for
> > "bad
> > > > taste".
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > If we have respect for and engage in
> dialog
> > with
> > > the
> > > > > moderates of groups we may not have to
> deal
> > with
> > > the
> > > > > extremists.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Dear Shuddha,
> > > > > 
> > > > > I think you mentioned earlier how
> religious
> > > people
> > > > offend
> > > > > the sensitivities of atheists.Could you
> > please
> > > > elaborate?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Thanks
> > > > > Rahul
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > --- On Sat, 8/30/08, Shuddhabrata
> Sengupta
> > > > > <shuddha at sarai.net> wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > From: Shuddhabrata Sengupta
> > > > <shuddha at sarai.net>
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Ways of
> Life
> > and
> > > > > Transgressions
> > > > > > To: ysaeed7 at yahoo.com
> > > > > > Cc: "Sarai list"
> > > > > <reader-list at sarai.net>
> > > > > > Date: Saturday, August 30, 2008,
> 2:44
> > AM
> > > > > > Dear Yousuf, dear all,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > thank you very much, Yousuf for
> your
> > mail. I
> > > > really
> > > > > > appreciate your  
> > > > > > point of drawing attention to the
> > available
> > > > > vocabularies of
> > > > > > visual  
> > > > > > representation and the way in
> which
> > they
> > > > determine or
> > > > > > influence the  
> > > > > > universe of visual
> repsesentatiation,
> > if
> > > only to
> > > > > underline
> > > > > > the fact  
> > > > > > that no visual artist is ever
> divorced
> > from
> > > the
> > > > > context tat
> > > > > > they are  
> > > > > > born into.  I have nowhere written
> > about why
> > > > Husain
> > > > > does
> > > > > > not choose  
> > > > > > to represent themes from the
> Islamic
> > canon,
> > > and I
> > > > > totally
> > > > > > agree with  
> > > > > > you that he does not do so because
> they
> > are
> > > not
> > > > > available
> > > > > > to him in  
> > > > > > his cultural miieu,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > As for apparently  transgressive
> cases
> > like
> > > > Husain or
> > > > > Dillu
> > > > > > Ram  
> > > > > > Kausari, I cannnot see why they
> should
> > not b
> > > > > celebrated.
> > > > > > Hindus  
> > > > > > should honour Husain and Muslims
> should
> > > honour
> > > > Dillu
> > > > > Ram.
> > > > > > In this way  
> > > > > > they would ensure that acts of
> > 'road
> > > > crossing'
> > > > > need
> > > > > > not necessarily  
> > > > > > end in lethal accidents,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > warm regards, and hoping for many
> more
> > road
> > > > crossings,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Shuddha
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > On 29-Aug-08, at 8:25 PM, Yousuf
> Saeed
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Dear Shuddha, others
> > > > > > > I really appreciate your
> > highlighting
> > > of the
> > > > fact
> > > > > that
> > > > > > Hussain's  
> > > > > > > intention may not be of
> insulting
> > the
> > > Hindus
> > > > by
> > > > > > drawing the deities  
> > > > > > > in the nude or otherwise. I
> am not
> > a
> > > > defender of
> > > > > > Hussain, but would  
> > > > > > > like to put across a few
> points.
> > Many
> > > people
> > > > (on
> > > > > this
> > > > > > list and  
> > > > > > > elsewhere) have pointed out
> that
> > > Hussain
> > > > never
> > > > > drew
> > > > > > any Muslim  
> > > > > > > character (such as the
> Prophet) in
> > this
> > > > manner,
> > > > > and
> > > > > > therefore his  
> > > > > > > intention must be to insult
> the
> > Hindus.
> > > They
> > > > also
> > > > > say
> > > > > > that such an  
> > > > > > > act by any artist in a Muslim
> > country
> > > (like
> > > > Saudi
> > > > > > Arabia) would  
> > > > > > > result in death penalty, and
> so
> > on. But
> > > > maybe
> > > > > Hussain
> > > > > > did not draw  
> > > > > > > an Islamic character in an
> > > > "immodest"
> > > > > > posture simply because such  
> > > > > > > an image or icon doesn’t
> exist
> > in the
> > > > > Islam's
> > > > > > visualcultural  
> > > > > > > tradition. If he does it,
> then
> > that
> > > would be
> > > > > > deliberately  
> > > > > > > provocative (although I am
> not
> > saying
> > > it
> > > > > shouldn't
> > > > > > be done). But he  
> > > > > > > could draw a Hindu deity in
> the
> > nude
> > > because
> > > > such
> > > > > a
> > > > > > tradition  
> > > > > > > exists in our Indian visual
> > culture. I
> > > doubt
> > > > if
> > > > > he
> > > > > > avoids
> > > > > > >  the depiction of Muslim
> themes
> > because
> > > he
> > > > is
> > > > > scared
> > > > > > of the  
> > > > > > > Islamists. Maybe he simply
> > can't
> > > relate
> > > > to it
> > > > > as
> > > > > > an Indian.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If I as an artist cannot
> express
> > my
> > > certain
> > > > > feelings
> > > > > > in the  
> > > > > > > language that has been taught
> to
> > be me
> > > by my
> > > > > parents,
> > > > > > and I  
> > > > > > > suddenly discover a new
> language
> > that
> > > allows
> > > > me
> > > > > to
> > > > > > express that  
> > > > > > > peculiar feeling in a much
> better
> > way
> > > than
> > > > what
> > > > > my
> > > > > > mother tongue  
> > > > > > > did, I would be happy to use
> the
> > new
> > > > language.
> > > > > There
> > > > > > are thousands  
> > > > > > > of poets and artists who
> found a
> > new
> > > way of
> > > > > expression
> > > > > > in a  
> > > > > > > language which every one in
> their
> > midst
> > > had
> > > > found
> > > > > > "inferior" – I am  
> > > > > > > talking for example of the
> > tradition of
> > > > Persian
> > > > > poets
> > > > > > of South Asia  
> > > > > > > who also wrote verses in
> Hindi or
> > > Hinduvi.
> > > > While
> > > > > poets
> > > > > > such as  
> > > > > > > Masud Sa'd Salman, Amir
> > Khusrau,
> > > > Abdurrahim
> > > > > > Khane-khana, Ghalib, or  
> > > > > > > Iqbal became famous for their
> > exquisite
> > > > verse in
> > > > > > Persian, their  
> > > > > > > heart pours out better in
> their
> > > Hinduvi,
> > > > Urdu or
> > > > > Braj
> > > > > > poetry where  
> > > > > > > they can come down to the
> earth
> > from
> > > the
> > > > lofty
> > > > > royal
> > > > > > palaces. We  
> > > > > > > often say, "Unki Hindi
> > shayeri
> > > mein
> > > > mitti ki
> > > > > > khushbu aati hai" (one  
> > > > > > > can smell the earth in their
> > vernacular
> > > > poetry).
> > > > > And I
> > > > > > >  think Hussain is no
> different
> > from
> > > them. He
> > > > > cannot
> > > > > > draw an Islamic  
> > > > > > > character in the nude because
> > it's
> > > > probably
> > > > > not in
> > > > > > his palette, or  
> > > > > > > doesn't touch his heart.
> (And
> > we
> > > cannot
> > > > force
> > > > > him
> > > > > > to do it to  
> > > > > > > become more politically
> correct).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You may say that a lot of
> > > semi-pornographic
> > > > > scenes
> > > > > > have been drawn  
> > > > > > > in Mughal or Persian
> miniatures,
> > and he
> > > > could
> > > > > have
> > > > > > followed that.  
> > > > > > > But that's not the point.
> > Hindu
> > > deities
> > > > are
> > > > > > flexible enough for us  
> > > > > > > to turn them around the way
> we
> > wish, to
> > > > express a
> > > > > > certain feeling  
> > > > > > > that cannot be expressed any
> other
> > way.
> > > So
> > > > why
> > > > > not
> > > > > > appreciate and  
> > > > > > > celebrate that fact. (I know
> such
> > a
> > > > statement
> > > > > from me
> > > > > > might raise  
> > > > > > > some eyebrows). I maybe a
> Muslim
> > but I
> > > > appreciate
> > > > > the
> > > > > > fact that you  
> > > > > > > can literally play with many
> Hindu
> > > deities.
> > > > Just
> > > > > the
> > > > > > other day I  
> > > > > > > heard Pandit Jasraj sing a
> khayal
> > in
> > > which
> > > > the
> > > > > lyrics
> > > > > > repeatedly  
> > > > > > > referred to Krishna as a chor
> > (thief).
> > > Does
> > > > that
> > > > > > insult a Hindu? Or  
> > > > > > > would it insult a Hindu if
> this
> > khayal
> > > was
> > > > sung
> > > > > by
> > > > > > Ustad Amir Khan?  
> > > > > > > (Incidentally, a large number
> of
> > > traditional
> > > > > Hindu
> > > > > > devotional  
> > > > > > > lyrics sung in classical
> music
> > have
> > > reached
> > > > us
> > > > > via
> > > > > > Muslim gharana  
> > > > > > > musicians, and much of
> devotional
> > Hindu
> > > > visual
> > > > > > mythology has come  
> > > > > > > to us via patwa artists of
> Bengal
> > who
> > > are
> > > > > > >  all Muslim. Can M.F.Hussain
> be
> > > detached
> > > > from
> > > > > that
> > > > > > continuity?)  
> > > > > > > Much of the popular calendar
> and
> > poster
> > > art
> > > > of
> > > > > 20th
> > > > > > century showing  
> > > > > > > Hindu deities was drawn by an
> > artist
> > > called
> > > > Hasan
> > > > > Raza
> > > > > > Raja of  
> > > > > > > Meerut. And the manner in
> which
> > most
> > > Hindu
> > > > > deities are
> > > > > > visualized  
> > > > > > > today comes from the
> pioneering
> > work of
> > > Raja
> > > > Ravi
> > > > > > Varma who was  
> > > > > > > clearly inspired by western
> style
> > of
> > > art
> > > > where
> > > > > human
> > > > > > models were  
> > > > > > > used to visualize the gods
> and
> > > goddesses.
> > > > So,
> > > > > does all
> > > > > > this insult  
> > > > > > > the Hindus? And what is the
> > > > "original"
> > > > > Hindu
> > > > > > way of imagining the  
> > > > > > > deities any way?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I liked your quoting from
> Kausari
> > who
> > > is
> > > > among
> > > > > many
> > > > > > Hindu poets who  
> > > > > > > have written/announced their
> > emotive
> > > > affiliation
> > > > > with
> > > > > > Prophet  
> > > > > > > Mohammad in the same way as
> say
> > with
> > > > Krishna. I
> > > > > doubt
> > > > > > if such  
> > > > > > > actions in the past may have
> met
> > with
> > > much
> > > > > resistance
> > > > > > (as you have  
> > > > > > > mentioned) – such examples
> were
> > a
> > > norm.
> > > > There
> > > > > are
> > > > > > many Hindu poets  
> > > > > > > who have written marsiyas
> full of
> > > pathos for
> > > > Imam
> > > > > > Hussain's  
> > > > > > > martyrdom, and many Muslim
> poets
> > who
> > > > composed
> > > > > adorable
> > > > > > songs for  
> > > > > > > Krishna. I don't think it
> was
> > too
> > > hard
> > > > to
> > > > > cross
> > > > > > the road in those  
> > > > > > > days. So, why are we busy
> throwing
> > > stones
> > > > onto
> > > > > each
> > > > > > other from the  
> > > > > > > two sides of a road? I could
> > imagine
> > > that at
> > > > > least an
> > > > > > online forum  
> > > > > > > like Sarai could act like a
> subway
> > or a
> > > > walk-over
> > > > > > bridge to cross  
> > > > > > > the busy highway. But
> currently it
> > > seems
> > > > more
> > > > > like a
> > > > > > road-block.  
> > > > > > > And we are all paying the
> toll.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Yousuf
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- On Fri, 8/29/08,
> Shuddhabrata
> > > Sengupta
> > > > > > <shuddha at sarai.net> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> From: Shuddhabrata
> Sengupta
> > > > > > <shuddha at sarai.net>
> > > > > > >> Subject: [Reader-list]
> Ways of
> > Life
> > > and
> > > > > > Transgressions
> > > > > > >> To: "Sarai
> list"
> > > > > > <reader-list at sarai.net>
> > > > > > >> Date: Friday, August 29,
> 2008,
> > 1:31
> > > PM
> > > > > > >> Dear All,
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> I have been intrigued by
> the
> > > exchange on
> > > > the
> > > > > list
> > > > > > of late
> > > > > > >> that has
> > > > > > >> preferred to jettison the
> term
> > > > > 'religion'
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > >> prefer in its stead the
> > > > > > >> euphimistic phrase -
> 'ways
> > of
> > > > life'.
> > > > > I am
> > > > > > referring
> > > > > > >> to the exchange
> > > > > > >> between Chanchal Malviya
> and
> > > Jeebesh
> > > > Bagchi,
> > > > > > arising out of
> > > > > > >> the
> > > > > > >> heated correspondence on
> the
> > > disruption
> > > > of a
> > > > > small
> > > > > > >> exhibition devoted
> > > > > > >> to M.F.Husain.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> i am quite convinced that
> the
> > term
> > > > > > 'religion'
> > > > > > >> which derives from the
> > > > > > >> latin root of the word
> religio
> > > (bond)
> > > > and
> > > > > religare
> > > > > > (the
> > > > > > >> verb form of
> > > > > > >> 'to bind')
> remains for
> > me a
> > > > useful
> > > > > word to
> > > > > > name the
> > > > > > >> act of committing
> > > > > > >> oneself in any form. In
> this
> > sense,
> > > > atheists
> > > > > and
> > > > > > agnostics
> > > > > > >> are just
> > > > > > >> as religious (in their
> > commitment
> > > to
> > > > doubt)
> > > > > as are
> > > > > > those
> > > > > > >> blessed with
> > > > > > >> faith. I would describe
> my
> > > religious
> > > > > commitment as
> > > > > > >> agnosticism - a
> > > > > > >> commitment to doubt
> > everything,
> > > > (including
> > > > > the
> > > > > > value of
> > > > > > >> doubt) and a
> > > > > > >> certainty that we cannot
> speak
> > > certainly
> > > > of
> > > > > > anything at
> > > > > > >> all, because
> > > > > > >> there are always
> > counterfactuals,
> > > and
> > > > > hitherto
> > > > > > unimagined,
> > > > > > >> or unknown
> > > > > > >> possibilities, that goad
> us on
> > to
> > > yet
> > > > newer
> > > > > > possibilities,
> > > > > > >> or to
> > > > > > >> return to some very old
> ones.
> > This
> > > is
> > > > just to
> > > > > say
> > > > > > that it
> > > > > > >> would be a
> > > > > > >> mistake to assume, as is
> often
> > done
> > > with
> > > > some
> > > > > > arrogance on
> > > > > > >> the part
> > > > > > >> of the more pronouncedly
> > > > 'faithful',
> > > > > that
> > > > > > atheists
> > > > > > >> and agnostics have
> > > > > > >> no 'spiritual'
> quests.
> > They
> > > do,
> > > > and
> > > > > they
> > > > > > dont, just
> > > > > > >> as those who are
> > > > > > >> ostentatiously
> > 'religious'
> > > do,
> > > > and
> > > > > dont,
> > > > > > or do only
> > > > > > >> in as much as it
> > > > > > >> allows them to burn a few
> > churches
> > > as
> > > > they go
> > > > > > questing. If
> > > > > > >> Hindu
> > > > > > >> fundamentalists have
> chosen to
> > > renounce
> > > > the
> > > > > ties
> > > > > > that bind
> > > > > > >> (religio)
> > > > > > >> them to life, who would I
> be
> > to
> > > object,
> > > > > because, I
> > > > > > am not a
> > > > > > >> Hindu.
> > > > > > >> But I have no quarrel
> with the
> > term
> > > > 'ways
> > > > > of
> > > > > > life'.
> > > > > > >> The more words we
> > > > > > >> have, the better.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> This discussion arose out
> of a
> > rage
> > > felt
> > > > by
> > > > > some
> > > > > > that a
> > > > > > >> group of
> > > > > > >> zealots had broken and
> > disrupted an
> > > > > exhibition
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > >> featured some
> > > > > > >> images of and by Husain,
> and
> > the
> > > counter
> > > > rage
> > > > > felt
> > > > > > by
> > > > > > >> others that the
> > > > > > >> zealots had no right to
> be
> > > criticised
> > > > because
> > > > > they
> > > > > > were
> > > > > > >> acting to
> > > > > > >> protect the honour of the
> > Hindu
> > > deities
> > > > that
> > > > > they
> > > > > > felt
> > > > > > >> Husain had
> > > > > > >> insulted.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> The second case is as
> follows
> > -
> > > what
> > > > right
> > > > > has
> > > > > > Husain, a
> > > > > > >> Muslim to
> > > > > > >> insult Hindu deities by
> > portraying
> > > them
> > > > in a
> > > > > > manner that is
> > > > > > >> offensive
> > > > > > >> to the sentiments of many
> > Hindus.
> > > > > (Husain's
> > > > > > >> motivations, or the
> > > > > > >> aesthetic merit of his
> images
> > are
> > > not
> > > > the
> > > > > issue
> > > > > > here, what
> > > > > > >> is at
> > > > > > >> issue is the insult seen
> to
> > have
> > > > occurred
> > > > > when a
> > > > > > non-Hindu
> > > > > > >> 'touches'
> > > > > > >> a sacred Hindu icon with
> his
> > > > > 'insulting'
> > > > > > >> imagination. Those so
> > > > > > >> enraged, also throw the
> > following
> > > > challenge,
> > > > > has
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > >> opposite ever
> > > > > > >> occurred?
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> I am not here to make a
> case
> > for
> > > Husain.
> > > > (As
> > > > > I
> > > > > > have said
> > > > > > >> before I do
> > > > > > >> not have a very high
> opinion
> > of his
> > > work
> > > > as
> > > > > an
> > > > > > artist). I
> > > > > > >> am here to
> > > > > > >> make a case for what is
> > considered
> > > to be
> > > > > > transgression. No
> > > > > > >> one can be
> > > > > > >> sure when they have
> > transgressed.
> > > > Because
> > > > > > transgression can
> > > > > > >> be seen
> > > > > > >> to occur even when the
> motives
> > of
> > > the
> > > > person
> > > > > > concerned are
> > > > > > >> far from
> > > > > > >> transgression. Husain can
> say
> > in
> > > his
> > > > defence,
> > > > > and
> > > > > > indeed
> > > > > > >> has on
> > > > > > >> occasion said that his
> > paintings
> > > are an
> > > > index
> > > > > of
> > > > > > his
> > > > > > >> appreciation of
> > > > > > >> Indic culture and its
> > diversity of
> > > > > expressions, of
> > > > > > his
> > > > > > >> closeness
> > > > > > >> (since early childhood)
> to
> > forms of
> > > > iconic
> > > > > imagery
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > >> popular Hinduism.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Here his intent is
> clearly not
> > to
> > > > insult, on
> > > > > the
> > > > > > contrary,
> > > > > > >> it is to
> > > > > > >> declare his appreciation
> for
> > the
> > > beauty
> > > > of
> > > > > the
> > > > > > iconography
> > > > > > >> of popular
> > > > > > >> Hinduism, a charge for
> which
> > he
> > > would be
> > > > > equally
> > > > > > hated by
> > > > > > >> both Hindu
> > > > > > >> as well as Muslim
> > fundamentalists.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> It has not been noticed
> that
> > no
> > > Muslim
> > > > > > fundamentalist or
> > > > > > >> even Muslim
> > > > > > >> religious figure has come
> out
> > in
> > > defence
> > > > of
> > > > > > Husain. They
> > > > > > >> are in fact
> > > > > > >> in tacit agreement with
> their
> > Hindu
> > > > peers. A
> > > > > > Muslim making
> > > > > > >> images,
> > > > > > >> and that too of Hindu
> > goddesses,
> > > because
> > > > he
> > > > > is
> > > > > > drawn to
> > > > > > >> them, can
> > > > > > >> only be seen as blasphemy
> in
> > their
> > > eyes.
> > > > On
> > > > > this,
> > > > > > like on
> > > > > > >> so many
> > > > > > >> other issues, Hindu and
> Muslim
> > > > > fundamentalists are
> > > > > > in total
> > > > > > >> agreement.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Let me come now to an
> > interesting
> > > > > counterfactual
> > > > > > argument.
> > > > > > >> I refer to
> > > > > > >> the life an work of a
> little
> > known
> > > late
> > > > > nineteenth
> > > > > > century
> > > > > > >> and early
> > > > > > >> twentieth century Urdu
> poet of
> > > Delhi
> > > > called
> > > > > Dillu
> > > > > > Ram
> > > > > > >> Kausari. Now as
> > > > > > >> his name suggests, Dillu
> Ram
> > was a
> > > > Hindu. The
> > > > > > trouble is,
> > > > > > >> throughout
> > > > > > >> his life he composed
> > deliriously
> > > > passionate
> > > > > > elegies
> > > > > > >> (na'at)  to the
> > > > > > >> Prophet Muhammad.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> One of his quatrains went
> as
> > > follows
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Kuch ‘ishq e Muhammad
> mein
> > nahin
> > > shart
> > > > e
> > > > > > Musulman!
> > > > > > >> Hai Kausari Hindu bhii
> > talabgaar e
> > > > Muhammad!
> > > > > > >> Allah re! kyaa raunaq e
> bazaar
> > e
> > > > Muhammad
> > > > > > >> Ke Ma’bood e Jahan bhi
> hai
> > > kharidaar e
> > > > > Muhammad!
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Being a Muslim is not a
> > condition
> > > for
> > > > loving
> > > > > > Muhammad!
> > > > > > >> Kausari, the Hindu, is
> also a
> > > seeker of
> > > > > Muhammad!
> > > > > > >> By Allah! How delightful
> is
> > the
> > > bazaar
> >> > of
> > > > > Muhammad
> > > > > > >> For the Lord of the
> Worlds is
> > also
> > > a
> > > > buyer of
> > > > > > Muhammad!
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> This kind of sentiment
> shocked
> > both
> > > > Hindus
> > > > > and
> > > > > > Muslims.
> > > > > > >> Hindus,
> > > > > > >> because how could a Hindu
> sing
> > what
> > > > amounted
> > > > > to
> > > > > > love songs
> > > > > > >> to a
> > > > > > >> Muslim prophet, and
> Muslims,
> > for
> > > the
> > > > same
> > > > > reason.
> > > > > > Both felt
> > > > > > >> slighted
> > > > > > >> and insulted by the
> > transgressive
> > > way in
> > > > > which the
> > > > > > >> imagination of the
> > > > > > >> poet had
> 'touched' the
> > body
> > > of
> > > > what
> > > > > was
> > > > > > sacred for
> > > > > > >> one, and not, for
> > > > > > >> the other.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Another poem, which
> proved to
> > be
> > > even
> > > > more
> > > > > > controversial,
> > > > > > >> went like
> > > > > > >> this -
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Rahmatulilalamin kay
> Hashar
> > mein
> > > > maana’
> > > > > khulay
> > > > > > >> Khalq saari Shaafa e Roz
> e
> > Jaza kay
> > > > saath hai
> > > > > > >> Laykay Dillu Raam ko
> jannat
> > mein
> > > jab
> > > > Hazrat
> > > > > gaye
> > > > > > >> Ma’loom huwa kay Hindu
> bhi
> > > Mahboob e
> > > > Khuda
> > > > > kay
> > > > > > saath hai!
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> The meaning of “Mercy
> unto
> > the
> > > > Worlds”
> > > > > became
> > > > > > apparent
> > > > > > >> on Judgement Day:
> > > > > > >> The whole creation is
> with the
> > > > Intercessor of
> > > > > The
> > > > > > Day of
> > > > > > >> Acquittal
> > > > > > >> When the Prophet took
> Dillu
> > Ram
> > > with him
> > > > into
> > > > > > Paradise
> > > > > > >> It was known that this
> Hindu
> > too is
> > > with
> > > > the
> > > > > > Beloved of
> > > > > > >> God!
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> This poem, especially
> > scandalized
> > > Muslim
> > > > > > orthodoxy, because
> > > > > > >> it dared
> > > > > > >> to suggest that the
> prophet
> > himself
> > > > would
> > > > > > intercede on
> > > > > > >> behalf of an
> > > > > > >> unbeliever on the day of
> > judgement.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> It is interesting to note
> that
> > > Dillu Ram
> > > > > never
> > > > > > became a
> > > > > > >> Muslim, at
> > > > > > >> least not in his
> lifetime. An
> > > article in
> > > > the
> > > > > > interesting
> > > > > > >> web portal
> > > > > > >> Chowk 
> > > > http://www.chowk.com/articles/12692 by
> > > > > one
> > > > > > Asif
> > > > > > >> Naqshbandi says
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> "It is also said
> that
> > Dillu
> > > Ram,
> > > > > delirious
> > > > > > with his
> > > > > > >> love, would
> > > > > > >> sometimes stand in the
> middle
> > of
> > > the
> > > > bazaar
> > > > > in
> > > > > > Delhi, put
> > > > > > >> chains
> > > > > > >> around his neck and feet
> and
> > shout
> > > at
> > > > the top
> > > > > of
> > > > > > his voice
> > > > > > >> to all
> > > > > > >> passers-by, “Muhammad!
> > Muhammad!
> > > > Muhammad!
> > > > > Yes!
> > > > > > Muhammad
> > > > > > >> is the
> > > > > > >> Beloved of God! Muhammad
> is
> > the
> > > first
> > > > and
> > > > > only
> > > > > > Beloved of
> > > > > > >> God! If God
> > > > > > >> loves you, He loves you
> > because of
> > > His
> > > > > Beloved!”
> > > > > > Some
> > > > > > >> people even
> > > > > > >> stoned him and he would
> often
> > come
> > > home
> > > > > covered in
> > > > > > blood
> > > > > > >> but he was
> > > > > > >> totally lost in his love
> of
> > the
> > > Prophet
> > > > > (peace and
> > > > > > >> blessings be upon
> > > > > > >> him!)"
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> There is an apocryphal
> story
> > of how
> > > on
> > > > his
> > > > > > deathbed Dillu
> > > > > > >> Ram Kausari
> > > > > > >> had a vision of the
> Prophet
> > > himself, who
> > > > came
> > > > > to
> > > > > > him, and
> > > > > > >> that he
> > > > > > >> read the Kalima with him.
> But
> > as
> > > this
> > > > vision
> > > > > is
> > > > > > reported to
> > > > > > >> have
> > > > > > >> appeared only to him, as
> he
> > lay
> > > dying,
> > > > and as
> > > > > he
> > > > > > is no
> > > > > > >> longer with us
> > > > > > >> to either confirm or deny
> this
> > > deathbed
> > > > > > conversion, we can
> > > > > > >> only
> > > > > > >> surmise that it was a
> > generous, but
> > > > somewhat
> > > > > > disingenuous
> > > > > > >> method of
> > > > > > >> having Dillu Ram's
> > somewhat
> > > > unorthodox
> > > > > Muslim
> > > > > > >> apologists claim him
> > > > > > >> for themselves.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> As far as we are
> concerned,
> > Dillu
> > > Ram
> > > > > Kausari,
> > > > > > caused grave
> > > > > > >> offence,
> > > > > > >> by his love for the
> Prophet,
> > both
> > > to
> > > > Hindu as
> > > > > well
> > > > > > as to
> > > > > > >> Muslim
> > > > > > >> zealots, as long as he
> lived.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> If, the things we call
> > religions
> > > are
> > > > > 'ways of
> > > > > > life'
> > > > > > >> then we can
> > > > > > >> always determine for
> ourselves
> > > whether
> > > > we
> > > > > want to
> > > > > > walk on a
> > > > > > >> one way
> > > > > > >> street that runs into a
> dead
> > end,
> > > or to
> > > > cross
> > > > > many
> > > > > > paths,
> > > > > > >> walking
> > > > > > >> down one way, for one
> purpose,
> > down
> > > > another
> > > > > way
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > >> another, and
> > > > > > >> sometimes just standing
> in
> > between
> > > > paths,
> > > > > figuring
> > > > > > out our
> > > > > > >> journey,
> > > > > > >> as we go about our lives.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> I find cases like Husain
> and
> > Dillu
> > > Ram
> > > > > Kausari
> > > > > > interesting
> > > > > > >> not
> > > > > > >> because of what they
> paint of
> > what
> > > they
> > > > say,
> > > > > but
> > > > > > because
> > > > > > >> they seem to
> > > > > > >> cause such prolonged
> traffic
> > jams
> > > on the
> > > > > 'ways
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > >> life'. And all they
> > > > > > >> were doing was crossing
> the
> > road.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> thanks and regards,
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Shuddha
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> -----
> > > > > > >> Shuddhabrata Sengupta
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > _________________________________________
> > > > > > >> reader-list: an open
> > discussion
> > > list on
> > > > media
> > > > > and
> > > > > > the city.
> > > > > > >> Critiques &
> Collaborations
> > > > > > >> To subscribe: send an
> email to
> > > > > > >>
> reader-list-request at sarai.net
> > with
> > > > subscribe
> > > > > in
> > > > > > the subject
> > > > > > >> header.
> > > > > > >> To unsubscribe:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> > > > > > >> List archive:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > _________________________________________
> > > > > > > reader-list: an open
> discussion
> > list on
> > > > media and
> > > > > the
> > > > > > city.
> > > > > > > Critiques &
> Collaborations
> > > > > > > To subscribe: send an email
> to
> > > > > > reader-list-request at sarai.net with
>  
> > > > > > > subscribe in the subject
> header.
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe:
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> > > > > > > List archive:
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Shuddhabrata Sengupta
> > > > > > The Sarai Programme at CSDS
> > > > > > Raqs Media Collective
> > > > > > shuddha at sarai.net
> > > > > > www.sarai.net
> > > > > > www.raqsmediacollective.net
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > >
> > _________________________________________
> > > > > > reader-list: an open discussion
> list on
> > > media and
> > > > the
> > > > > city.
> > > > > > Critiques & Collaborations
> > > > > > To subscribe: send an email to
> > > > > > reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> > subscribe
> > > in
> > > > the
> > > > > subject
> > > > > > header.
> > > > > > To unsubscribe:
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list 
> > > > > > List archive:
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>

More information about the reader-list mailing list