[Reader-list] Ways of Life and Transgressions

[Ishwar]

Dear Inder,

Let me get this clear. I'm very strongly against ever-increasing cases of religious intolerance, and as an atheist, Hussain's or Nasreen's expressions do not offend me the least. My question was purely theoretical.

I request you to note the differences between cause and effect - Hurt is the cause, and Babri Masjid demolition, Taslima Nasreen, Danish Cartoon, Hussain episodes are effects. What is it that you wish to decry? The cause? the effect? both?

My initial reply to Aarti's mail was, from a theoretical standpoint, to her questioning the validity of the cause, the 'hurt', and I believe that, given the frameworks in consideration, particularly the differences, hurt is understandable, and the statement "Everybody gets hurt" doesn't quite apply because the religious frameworks clearly place divine rights over individual's rights. Is it your claim that all religious frameworks stop doing that?

How does one react to such incidents, I have no clue. Protests, I'd guess. Attempts a dialogue to bridge the gaps, probably.

The effects of this cause can be peaceful, a dialogue in an utopian world.  Effects, like such incidents, however are something that every person who believes in individual's liberties must fight against.  If you don't believe in this distinction between cause and effect, and understanding the reasons behind one, while rejecting the other, I withdraw my case.

 
--
Regards,
Ishwar


Just another resurrected Neozoic Archosaur comics.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mojosaurus/sets/72157600257724083/



----- Original Message ----
From: inder salim <indersalim at gmail.com>
To: reader-list at sarai.net
Sent: Sunday, September 7, 2008 3:20:43 PM
Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Ways of Life and Transgressions

Dear Yousf,

Let us keep it simple.

I should have used the word ' unwittingly' instead 'boldly' and that
might have saved you from writing " I am the last person on earth to
condemn artists for having monopoly on liberalism ". I know you are
not against artists, and I consider you too an artist in your own
unique way.

Now you are looking for an alternative, right, take a case like Babri
Masjid. The Sang Parivar thought that their sentiments are 'hurt'
because a king demolished a temple and constructed a mosque on the
same spot. I am not speaking on behalf of Muslims, but on behalf of
Liberals, ( as  it is convenient to use ) that the mosque should not
have  been demolished.  But the monopoly on 'hurt' scored and we
witnessed a monumental tragedy.  what was the alternative?

There are hundreds of other such examples where this kind of 'hurt'
scored and we are reduced to mute spectators.  A government, based on
a secular constitution should not have given in to this so called
'hurt'. That is my premise. Recently there was an attack on a very
small exhibition of prints by Hussain organized by Sahmat. These are
not simple hooligans but are from a strong political base with an
agenda, to create a panic. They were so daring that they even called
the TV channels to document their action. How to denounce that, May be
Mr. Ishwar has an answer, People should be told simply that ' freedom
of expression' is as important to life as water, food and sleep.
Recently, an Italian museum rejected the Pope's desire to remove a
frog- Christ sculpture from their display. There was no hue and cry
from Christians world.  We need to learn from those examples. What is
so big about a cartoon. Cartoons are made to bring humour in our lives
and not hate. We need to cultivate an accurate sense of 'hurt'.  It is
time we feel hurt because of immense environmental degradation on our
planet.  We should be ashamed of our acts against women.  We should
feel 'hurt' on seeing people begging on the streets.

Any answer Mr. Iswar,  why Taslima Nasreen was hounded out of Inidia.
Both Hussain and Taslima are known for their inaccurate works, but
have found a huge support from artists , poets writers and other such
segments of our society.  are we insane that we support a Taslima and
a Hussain, a Chandra Mohan from time to time. We are, indeed a small
segment of our society, and if we all don't support this minority
within the minority then what we have is complete absence of
alternative.   Is that what you want for the sake of a ' majority'.

Who is afraid of Artists, poets, and dancers?  Hussain sahib was once
a Rajya Sahba member, and all he did there was drawings of politicians
arguing in the parliament.  I wish he had drawn them masturbating
during sessions.  He is less courageous,  we all know, but in any
case, is he a threat to our society, or someone who announces monetary
awards to behead the artist or a writer? Opposing 'freedom of
expression' is not a 'view point'  but a bully.

Of course, artists and poets love audiences, without audiences there
is not art and culture, but how come we oppose a change of taste even.
Haven't people clapped to something fresh, new and radical, even on
the stage when politicians play it out like actors on the stage.
People want change, but 'some of well read persons' want to keep us
unchanged.   Even now we have very few women poets, let alone the past
when there were little chances for them to come forward. Males of the
family  and society were often hurt as and when their daughters would
come out in the open. Is it a view point ?  We are all here for a
change. Let us support the change.  Prophets and saints too have been
poets in their own unique ways who have always uttered verse with
freshness of mood and change. But we simply become worshippers of that
change, and obstruct the possibility of  change 'unwittingly'

Yes, millions go the Haridwar for a sacred dip. But, I guess the dip
becomes a very small component of the journey to a pilgrimage . The
spectacle of a concentrated human mass is what attracts the people.
The urge to brush shoulders with others, new clothes, picnic and
exchange of looks with strangers is what seduces the average Indian.
that is true, because the pollution level in Ganga does not 'hurt'
them in the first place, which proves they are not too serious about
the holdy dip.
Who is truly religious? The same applies to people who go to Haj.

With love
is





On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 10:13 AM, Ishwar <ishwarsridharan at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Guess I wasn't clear enough in what I intended to convey, and lack of clarity always invites misinterpretation.
>
> Inder, what made you come to the conclusion that understanding hurt sentiments in religious and other frameworks is tantamount to declaring support for fundamentalism? For that matter, when did understanding anything equated to supporting it?
>
> As an artist, can I assume that your work would not be received with enthusiasm from every section of the population?  That being the case. I think it's vital to understand that the religious communities' hurt comes from something that's fundamental to their current framework, in the local context. Saying 'Dude, everybody gets hurt, so chill' is not quite the answer.
>
> After respecting the reasoning behind the hate, one might choose to work towards a conversation. I find the comment 'how to
> denounce entire majority of religous world who have mononly on 'hurt'"' rather strange. We aren't here to denounce viewpoints are we? I'd thought certain actions are to be denounced, not word views. If that's not the case, how is liberalism any different from religion, the very majority we seek to denounce?
>
>
> P.S: Pardon my ignorance of keywords to express ideas.
>
>  Ishwar
>
>
> Just another resurrected Neozoic Archosaur comics.
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/mojosaurus/sets/72157600257724083/
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: inder salim <indersalim at gmail.com>
> To: reader-list at sarai.net
> Sent: Saturday, September 6, 2008 9:50:56 PM
> Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Ways of Life and Transgressions
>
> Dear Yousuf
> this is too sweeping a statement by a well read person like you.
>
> this also gives us a clue - how often well read people quickly throw
> reasoning to dust bins and join hands with those who boldy declare
> 'fundamentalsim' as their guiding light on the path of spirituality.
> if we condemn artists  for having monoply on 'liberalism' then how to
> denounce entire majority of religous world who have mononly on 'hurt'
> ?   Our sufi bhakti traditions  were much liberal in their ' ways of
> living' than what you consider as offensive.
>
> this also teachs me that we are basically too small to speak anything
> truely about these overwhelming issues through these short cut
> discussions,
>
> Here, i think of paintings, poetry, music  dance (  al erotic, sacred
> and profane ) and all the eccentric moods of our society, even if '
> well read people' consider it just an entertainment for artists
> themselves, and couple of few others in the world.
>
> We are in a serious trouble. or only I ( artist )  feel it ?
>
> love
> is