HVK Archives: Hindu tradition is catholic, Mr PM
Hindu tradition is catholic, Mr PM - The Pioneer
Sandhya Jain
()
January 8, 1999
Title: Hindu tradition is catholic, Mr PM
Author: Sandhya Jain
Publication: The Pioneer
Date: January 8, 1999
"O dharma, how hard it is to understand your essence. Only you
know who protects you and who destroys you."
Ishwar Chandra Vidvasagar's pensive dirge may be taken as a
warning that the legitimate perspective of culture should not
become a predicament for society. Few know that Vidyasagar's
first work, Vasudevcarit (The Life, of Vasudev), based on the
tenth book of the Bhagavata Purana dealing with the amorous deeds
of Krishna, was written as a school primer. It was considered
unsuitable for publication by GT Marshall, secretary of the
Sanskrit College and College of Fort William.
My point is that ever since the Christian missionaries sneaked a
piggyback ride with the colonialists, India has witnessed an
alliance of unsurpassed fidelity between Victorian sexual prudery
and middle class puritanism, which distrusts excessive
individualism and deviance from the common norm. This modern
bourgeois morality is of an entirely different genre from the
moral restraint exhorted by the shastras (religious texts), and
may even be regarded as un-Indian to the extent that it seeks to
rigidly delimit the contours of social conduct, without providing
for exceptions to the rule.
But now that the revered Empress, who lent her name to an age of
repressed sexuality, has herself been found fit for exile from
Eden, it is time we allowed the catholicism of the sanatan dharma
(eternal way of life) to triumph. It is now almost a month since
Deepa Mehta's celebrated film, Fire, became victim of a defacto
bin. Yet, neither Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee nor any of
his colleagues have seen fit to denounce the phoney morality
behind the violence in cinema halls in Mumbai and Delhi.
The sudden targeting of a movie running uneventfully for three
weeks without adverse impact on public morals reflects sheer
prejudice against unusual (though not unknown) forms self-
expression. It was a perfect opportunity for our poet Prime
Minister to speak up for the fraternity of liberty, but he opted
for discretion over valour. Left alone to carry the cross, the
inexperienced Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi tossed the ball back to the
Censor Board's court. It is to be hoped that Pramod Mahajan, who
took over as I&B Minister after the event, will vindicate his
reputation for broadmindedness by the time the case comes up in
the Supreme Court, where Mehta has turned for justice.
The court will no doubt decide the case on merit, yet there are
issues of concern to the discerning public that deserve comment
even at this stage. The first is the tragic polarisation among
intellectuals, though the issue truly involves artistic
privilege, freedom of conscience and self-expression, and above
all, women's right to experience and articulate the multiple
dimensions of their personalities as they journey to discover
their
Identity and Self. Yet, it is mostly Left-leaning intellectuals
who have supported Mehta, and the silence of centrists and
rightists makes the fight for Fire seem like a gay rights'
movement, which, in fairness, it is not.
Homosexuality/lesbianism is as old as human civilisation, and is
no more unusual than, say, a left-handed child. Yet, world over,
the tyranny of the majority has confined them to the closet, and
they have been hounded as deviants, lumpens, outcastes. In
India, males have mainly survived in small religious sects, and
little is known about their female counterparts. Mehta is not
quite correct when she says that lesbianism is part of the Indian
heritage; though she probably only means that its existence has
been acknowledged by ancient chroniclers. Actually, it is simply
a human condition, and is as universal as the four blood groups
and 24 chromosomes.
In the West, homosexuals have been victims of witch-hunts,
Inquisition, et al. It was only with the qualitatively different
urbanisation created by the Industrial Revolution that they began
to rind space for themselves. Yet it took the Jewish pogroms of
the first half of this painful century to morally discredit the
hunting down of' human beings like animals. Homosexuals had
their day in the 60s' sexual revolution when flower children,
hippies, et al took over the campuses and shook the smug, moral
virtuousness of civilised society by tile scruff of its neck.
They infused enough energy into the environment for heterosexuals
to re-examine their prejudices and beliefs and come to the
conclusion that they do not have the right to judge, much less
condemn, their fellowmen. The roots of western tolerance lie in
this simple humility. Yet, even today, prejudices are fairly
deeply entrenched, and homosexual rights ire an issue in every US
presidential election.
Coming to India, there is a need to distinguish between tradition
and scripture. To the extent that Hindu texts acknowledge
unnatural sex, they may be said also to validate it, albeit for
the select such as the male worshippers of Kartikeya (despite
efforts I have not been able to find direct references to
lesbianism). This brings us to traditional practice.
In every society, the sheer struggle to survive nature, disease
and war, created a powerful impulse towards large families. This
naturally tilted the scales in favour of heterosexual unions, and
if we recall the horrible treatment of barren women we can
appreciate the hatred towards relationships that are by
definition without "fruit". This is understandable when we
remember that it was only in 1800 that the world population first
touched one thousand million (now close to 6,000 million).
Naturally, homosexuality/lesbianism was seen as perverse,
deviant, and inspired by evil. However, now the time has come
for a mature realisation that homosexuality/lesbianism is the
natural sexual tendency of some individuals. There is simply no
justice in bounding and ridiculing individuals choosing a non-
heterosexual relationship.
The moral prefect was a painful part of the history of the
Christian "lest, which took 2,000 years of sustained struggle by
the so-called heretics to overcome. Today, it is a grim reality
in Islam. But it has neither religious nor historic sanction in
the sanatan dharma, and must not be allowed to make a backdoor
entry in a society justly famed for its civilisational tolerance.
Mr Balasaheb Thackeray needs to be told that Hinduism neither
appoints nor needs "sole spokesmen". If, as is being alleged, Mr
Thackeray is merely fishing for a cause to bring back his party's
fast eroding middle class vote, he would do well to contain the
menace of the "hafta culture" (regular payments from well-off
families) that is beginning to rival underworld extortions.
Mehta may have made a competent film, but she misses the point
when she says that her film is about "the sexuality of the
emerging Indian woman", thereby inadvertently giving the
impression that women in general are seeking fulfillment by
experimenting with such relationships. The point is not a choice
of sex, or even a right to experiment with sex, but the
expression and fulfilment of a naturally burgeoning sexuality.
The difference is vital. In this context, the "emerging Indian
woman" is really the suppressed ancient woman (of all cultures)
struggling to come forth and display an extra facet of her
multifarious personality.
The Indian tradition has always recognised that sexuality is
intimately and inextricably associated with creativity and its
expression. Indeed, that is why they are both located in the sex
chakra.
Back
Top
|
