I agree entirely with the Indian judges who have declared painter M. F. Husain to be innocent of all charges of 'offending the public sentiments'. In fact, only the sentiments of a narrow-minded minority were offended. You cannot have a free society that does not permit freedom of speech and expression. The precedent for nudity and erotica in Hinduism was established long ago by Khujaraho and thousands of other ancient Hindu artworks, the Kama Sutra, and by multiple quotations within the Hindu scriptures. Sky-clad sadhus march at Melas every year.
The nakedness and sexual implications in Husain's depictions of characters from the Hindu pantheon are found within the Hindu scriptures themselves, and also in ancient Hindu temple art. I do not agree that Husain's imagery of naked Hindu gods, or even the sexual metaphors implied in some of his paintings of them, are an insult to Hinduism.
Look at Husain's painting of the nawab and the naked Brahmin. The nawab looks fierce, angry, violent, nasty, and mean, while the naked Brahmin looks natural, beautiful, nonviolent, elegant, and attractive. Husain's painting is actually a compliment to Hinduism and a rebuke of the Moghuls.
If Husain's name were Chakravarty or Subramanian, would he be the target of so much antipathy from some Hindus? Would the Hindu extremists be so critical of a Hindu artist who painted his own gods naked?
Hindu extremists should not be allowed to decide for all Hindus what is, or what is not, proper Hindu behavior or belief, or who is, and who is not, a Hindu.
One problem with trying to enforce Hindu 'fundamentalism' is that the militant fundamentalists will inevitably represent their own sects and oppose all others, leading to a hostile disputation among Hindus over doctrine. That would not be good for Hinduism or for India.
Hindu extremists act as if Hinduism were their own private property. They define Hinduism in their own terms, which is acceptable, but they go further, and they go too far, in trying to enforce their version of Hinduism on all Hindus. They ignore the fact that Hindu artists have portrayed the Hindu gods as nudes in the past and in the present. Hindu artists who paint their gods in the nude get a free pass from the extremists, at least so far.
Let the Hindu extremists control Indian society and you will have government by the narrow-minded zealots, just as you have in Pakistan. It is not Hinduism that the Hindu extremists promote, but their own narrow-minded and bigoted interpretation of Hinduism.
Look at Hindu art prior to the invasion of the Moghuls during the medieval period, and you will see that before the Moslems came and forcibly influenced Hindu culture, nudity in art and and in daily life was common among the Hindus. Women in pre-Islamic Hindu art were frequently dipicted naked above the waist and often also below the waist.
Actually the fear and taboo on nakedness in art and in life was introduced by the Moslems, and it is not really a Hindu tradition. You can thank the Moslems for the purdah; why would Hindus want to emulate the puritanical, narrow-minded, and life-denying taboos of the Moslems?
Hindus, if you don't want to dominated by the Moslems, why do you imitate their fear and hatred of the human form, which was not a part of Hindu culture before the Moslems invaded India?
My advice is, let your own Hinduism be a religion of tolerance, for which Hinduism is already justly famous. Try not to be like so many of the Christians and Moslems, whose intolerance makes for wars of aggression and Theocratic dictatorships. Save your outrage for a real threat to Bharata, such as the way in which the USA has armed and enabled the Pakistani ISI and border-crossing militants to attack Kashmir.
-- GF
Close
Extremism, Gregory, as your blog implies, is self-destructive in any religion; and certainly Hinduism should not go that way...
Reply | | Report Abuse
Hullo GF
In Hindu thought SHEEL - the essense of gentlemanliness is considered to be the fountainhead of all human greatness. I can not therefore condone its absence any where, least of all here at home in India and among fellow Hindus.
Have you heard of an old saying - an eye for an eye etc.? Well where enlightened behaviour is not the norm such things tend to become yardsticks of instant justice. Not good for society.
Sceptic
Reply | | Report Abuse
skeptic wrote: "To teach secularism to an enlightened Hindu is like the old saying of carrying coal back to Newcatle."
-- GF
Okay skeptic, so let's be liberal and let Husain have his freedom of speech and expression. In a secular, democratic society, it might be appropriate to protest the placement of one of Husain's nudes on a postage stamp or in a public building, but ruffians attacking galleries and destroying his paintings or hauling him into court on trumped-up charges is really going too far.
As for the Imams, I doubt that many of them visit the art website where I found Husain's 'disbeliever' quote.
Reply | | Report Abuse
Hullo FG
To teach secularism to an enlightened Hindu is like the old saying of carrying coal back to Newcatle.
Obviously, you hold a brief for MFH and have no notion of the evil of blasphemy in Islam And Christianity. Hindus do not engage in the usiness of safeguarding God's standing or regime. To us art is a mix of satyam, shivam and sundram. Should you need any help in deciphering thses do revert.
" Mr M F Husain said (Fri Nov 21 1997 20:56 IST)
Curious: Here I would like to quote E M Foster "I don't believe in God, Oh God help me in my disbelief."
Why does he not address these sentiments to the Imams of the Muslim world?
Sceptic
Reply | | Report Abuse
Reply | | Report Abuse
Sceptic:
I didn't say that I thought that Hinduism risked an imminent demise. What I said was that the Hindu extremists threaten to impose their own peculiar interpretation of Hinduism on all Hindus and on the nation of India.
When the Imams placed a fatwa and a reward on the head of Salman Rushdie after he published the Satanic Verses, they made Moslems look like barbarians and fools in the eyes of the entire civilized world. By harassing M.F. Husain and destroying his paintings, the Hindu extremists are doing the same thing to Hinduism.
I have read what Husain has to say about the animosity that the Hindu extremists have against his art, and it is clear that with his art he is simply expressing himself within both the Indian tradition and the modern tradition of art.
Husain's painting of Hanuman flying through the sky holding aloft the Dronagiri mountain is immensely charming.
Anyone who doesn't like M.F. Husain's paintings always has the option of not looking at them. No one is forcing anyone to visit a home or a gallery where Husain's paintings are displayed.
In the quotation below, Mr. Husain describes himself as a nonbeliever, so to accuse Husain of an Islamic prejudice against Hinduism does not reflect his actual position, which seems to be that of a secularist and a progressive. -- GF
Mr M F Husain said (Fri Nov 21 1997 20:37 IST)
Since there are a lot of questions on the Saraswati painting this is what I have to say: Saraswati is the goddess of arts and literature and it has been depicted in Indian culture and Indian miniatures in the past in various forms. The one which I painted was with great respect and conviction, there was no intention except to create an image of Saraswati in the modern language of painting, which some people couldn't understand the nuances of artistic appeal. This was not a painting but a drawing which was done 20 years back and was not meant for exhibition or publication.
Mr M F Husain said (Fri Nov 21 1997 20:56 IST)
Curious: Here I would like to quote E M Foster "I don't believe in God, Oh God help me in my disbelief."
Reply | | Report Abuse
Hullo GF
Your concern about Hinduism risking imminent demise is laudable. Since it is not a rigid body of doctrines and dogmas it is imperishable. It is a cultural ethos that thrives in openness and renovation.
" If Husain's name were Chakravarty or Subramanian, would he be the target of so much antipathy from some Hindus? Would the Hindu extremists be so critical of a Hindu artist who painted his own gods naked?"
You are right that precisely is the point. MF is an ouitsider, a member of a communal denomination openly inmical to Hindus, in particular, and India at large. His actions are bound to be judged more critically. Can he caricature Mohamed? Can you do that? Do you permit open abuse of your tolerance or goodness? Surely, there are other subjects for MFH to paint.
Sceptic
Reply | | Report Abuse