Saturday, July 9, 2016

Will Chief Justice S.K.Kaul take suo motu cognizance of the suffering of this Thiruchengode woman stigmatized by ‘Madhorubagan’ book?

I am sure many in Tamilnadu must be seething with anger at the insensitivity exhibited in the judgement of the High Court in seeing no offence but only freedom of speech in the way Mr Perumal Murugan, has constructed the ideas behind a still-in practice ritual in a famous temple in his novel “Madhoru Bagan”. One may argue that judgements must be sensible and that insensitivity is not an issue. But coming as it does closely on the heels of the Swathi murder case which received more media publicity after the Madras High Court lambasted the authorities for insensitive treatment to the victim with a remark that “Even a dead person has got right to dignity under the Constitution”, one is at a loss to understand how the esteemed Chief Justice of Madras High Court failed to see the affront cast by the novel on the dignity of every woman who has attended the festival – for countless generations from the past.

The ritual under scanner is one related to childless women circumambulating a stone / boulder called “Varadi-k-kal” (வரடிக்கல்) on top of the hillock of the temple of Arthanareeswara on the day of Vaikasi Vishaka during the annual car festival. Beliefs like this have existed in many other temples in India. One can say that this belief is widespread even today in  temples dedicated to snake god. Circumambulating the peepal tree for begetting children is a more widespread belief which I used to think was even present in Indus sites.



These beliefs could not have continued to exist if the prayers had not fructified. While the devout ones engaged in these rituals believe that God had answered their prayers, Perumal Murugan has thought differently. Claiming to have done a research on how the children are born to these women, he has spun his story that all these women – who were all married and childless, have had intercourse with unknown men in the guise of the ritual and borne children out of it. This has not just offended the people of that geographic region of Tamilnadu where the faith in the ritual still lives on, it has also cast a slur on countless women – all women now living and had lived - who had taken part in the ritual. When confronted to show proof of this which he has claimed in the preface, he had none to show.

In this background the issue has gone to the court. The court did not find anything offensive in his story and instead marked it as ‘freedom of speech’ while in reality it was ‘freedom of imagination’ crossing the border of another person’s dignity.

Not long ago the same court condemned the police with ‘insensitivity’ for having let Swathi uncovered for 2 full hours.

But the Chief Justice does not find anything insensitive with the blanket stigmatisation of the women who take part in that ritual. Strangely enough he has found insensitivity in the eyes of the people who objected to the depiction.

A part of the judgement reads

 “It is not to be judged by the eyes of the insensitive which sees only obscenity in everything… No one reading the novel would be persuaded to draw a definite conclusion as sought to be canvassed by the opponents of the novel that the endeavour of the author was to portray all women coming to the car festival as prostitutes. This is a complete misreading of the novel and its theme.”

Who is insensitive? Whose eyes are insensitive? When I scurried through many articles commenting on this judgement to look for some justice to those unknown women, I could not find any but only one which was written sensibly by none other than Mr S.Gurumurthy. The last paragraph of his essay tells the real pain inflicted by Perumal Murugan, the author of the book.

The last paragraph runs as follows:

An educated lady professional from Tiruchengode, who begot a child by undertaking the Visakam ritual, asked me what those who had read Murugan’s book would think of her and her child. I had no answer.”

Does the learned judge have an answer for this?

He said that no one reading this novel would draw a conclusion on the women who undertook the ritual. Here is one ready to have expressed her anguish to Mr Gurumurthy.

What explanation the Chief Justice can give this women and countless others who are silently suffering?

Will he take suo motu congnizance of the suffering inflicted on this woman by Perumal Murugan and bring justice to her, similar to the way the HC took note of Swathi’s murder?

Does he have the sensitivity to realise that like this woman, countless number of women who have done the ritual have been massacred like Swathi in public and more than that, stripped off their dignity?

*********************************
From

Madhorubagan, satanic verses, polyester prince

By 

S. Gurumurthy

The liberals in and outside the media are celebrating the Madras High Court judgment in the case of Perumal Murugan who wrote a book “Madhorubagan” — the book that had invited massive protests in Western Tamil Nadu by the Kongu Vellalar community who felt hurt by its contents. The High Court has written a long and profound prose on how liberal the Indian Constitution is and the freedom it guarantees. The Murugan case judgment calls for a comment in the backdrop of the country’s political and constitutional ecosystem.

Madhorubagan case


First, the facts of the Murugan case. The judgment sets out the contents of the book and the objections to it in paras 27 to 62, which are important. Madhorubagan is the name of the Hindu temple deity “Arthanareeswara” in Tiruchengode where from Murugan hails. The belief is that on the Vaikasi Visakam day of the temple’s annual car festival, childless couples who circumambulate the ‘Varadi Kal’ [a large boulder on hilltop] would be blessed with a child, known as “Sami Kodutha Pillai” [God Given Child]. Murugan’s book centres around a childless couple, Kali and Ponna of the 1940s. Kali’s mother advises him to allow his wife Ponna into the sexual orgy that takes place on the Vaikasi Visakam day — so that she begets a child through the orgy. 

As Kali refuses, Ponna’s brother tells him that the popular belief “Sami Kodutha Pillai” is only child begotten by women by sex orgy with strangers during Vaikasi Visakam. The imputation is also that most married Kongu Vellalar womenfolk in Tiruchengode indulge in sexual orgies and the childless among them get impregnated in the one night orgy. The festival is a once a year opportunity for youths from “untouchable” community, according to Murugan, to explore their libidos and orchestrate it on Kongu Vellalar community women above 30 years. Murugan even wrote that the youths would boast about how many women they had had sex with on that one night. It does not need a seer to say that unless a community is saintly, it must feel hurt by such writing, hurt to its religious feelings apart.

Facts not denied

The judgment does not indicate that the facts set out by the community are false. The only issue discussed is whether the author had intended the book as fiction or as historical narrative. Far from claiming it as fiction Murugan had said in his preface that he had studied and documented the Tiruchengode orgies. But when, at the peace meet called by government officials, community leaders asked for the documents, he could show none.

Despite the author himself asserting to the contrary [even though he withdrew his claim later], the book has been accepted as fiction in the judgment. Constitutional freedom of expression is not unlimited. Hurting facts maybe permitted. But hurting fiction should not be easily allowed. The law is clear that expressions should not offend decency or morality nor defame anyone or incite violence. Can women of a community be trivialised as amoral like Murugan has done to assert one’s constitutional right? Do such undignified remarks about women, whose dignity is paramount in any civilised society, promote freedom?

Self-exculpatory

The Court has castigated those who protested against the book as “a section of people just seeking to put themselves or their ancestors in the shoes of persons who are affected because of a reference to a location and a folklore, which description of location also stood withdrawn subsequently, since the author believed it was a work of fiction and could have been based anywhere else”. What impression the book intends and creates in the average reader is critical, not what the author Murugan believes, particularly post facto. Murugan’s retroactive belief is clearly self-exculpatory. He has written not about an unspecific section of people, but particularly about the women of the community he names. 

That community and the ritual are connected geographically and could not relate to any other place or any other community. He names and undermines the Kongu Vellalar community women. Imagine the community in Murugan’s book is about a more aggressive community or its ancestors. There would have been no peace meeting as in Tiruchengode — but only massive violence. Threat of violence, a worldly reality, has led to judicial silence, even restraint, on free expression. The most famous case was on Salman Rushdie’s book, “Satanic Verses”. Some 25 years back Islamic cleric Ayatollah Khomeini issued a fatwa to kill him for writing that book. The man is under protection till today. Recall Kamal Haasan’s film Vishwaroopam, three years back. The film cleared by Censor Board was banned in Tamil Nadu on law and order grounds as the protesting Muslims halted Chennai. The ban led to stopping its screenings in neighbouring states, even in a few foreign countries.

Satanic Verses and Polyester Prince

Judicial declarations on liberty and freedom hardly enthuse the people because of lack of consistent and evenhanded approach to all cases. When the Supreme Court denied the right to life and liberty in ADM Jabalpur case during Emergency and post-Emergency pontificated on the right of Maneka Gandhi to passport as part of the right to liberty, it was laughable. Salman Rushdie claimed his “Satanic Verses” was just a fiction and apologised, but no one took notice of it. India which, according to the Murugan case judgment, has “one of the most modern and liberal Constitutions” was the first country to ban Rushdie’s book! Liberals were afraid of challenging the ban. Even if it were challenged no court would have pontificated on the freedom of expression of Rushdie because had the book not been banned there would have been riots all over. Likewise no liberal challenged the ban on Vishwaroopam before courts like Murugan’s admirers enterprisingly do now. The reason is obvious. In the face of threat of violence, no one looks at freedom of expression. Liberals vanish before violent mobs. Take another case, that of Dhirubhai Ambani. This newspaper had carried on a relentless campaign in the 1980s to expose the wrongdoings of Reliance. But the government of the day joined hands with the wrongdoer and raided the paper, arrested the writer, harassed the owners, and filed over 300 criminal cases against it to protect Ambani. Later Hamish MacDonald, an Australian journalist, wrote a book “Polyester Prince” which documented the work of this paper and misdeeds of Ambani. “Polyester Prince” was barred in India. By who? By the judiciary at the lower level! The liberals like those who are crying for freedom of expression today did not take the case to the High Court or Supreme Court. The reason is self-evident. It concerned a most feared and richest Indian business group.

Ban on other books

See the sort of books banned by governments in India. The book “The Reminiscence Of The Nehru Age” by M O Mathai, secretary to Pundit Nehru, which explosively described all important personalities of Nehru era, was banned in 1978. Why? Because it offended the powerful. Freedom of expression didn’t matter. “Understanding Islam through Hadis” by Ram Swarup was banned in 1991. Why? Because it was critical of political Islam. “The Moor’s Last Sigh” a fiction by Salman Rushdie was banned in 1995. Why? It contained a character resembling Balasaheb Thackeray, the powerful Shiv Sena boss, also had a dog named Jawaharlal. The Supreme Court declared the ban unconstitutional in 1996. Yet, the book sellers, fearing violence, refused to stock the book in Maharashtra, the Shiv Sena forte. No liberal approached the Supreme Court for contempt. More.
The “True Furqan”, written by two Muslims Al Saffee and Al Mahdee, was banned for purportedly mocking Islam. A Pune court ordered the copies of the book by Anand Yadav which was derogatory to Tukaram and Dnyaneshwar to be destroyed in June 2014. Clearly, there is no consistency in the executive or judicial approach on objected books. The only guiding principle seems to be whether it will lead to violence.

Constitutional hypocrisy

The Tiruchengode community who were protesting against ‘Madhorubagan’ were ordinary people — dhoti-wearing countrymen, not modern urbanites. Not like the wealthy Ambanis, who could threaten the publisher to pulp the book or politically powerful like those who could get books, like the ones on Pundit Nehru or Bal Thackeray, banned.

The Tiruchengode people conducted a peace talk democratically where Perumal Murugan was invited to produce the evidence he had claimed. There was no violence. No one abused or molested him despite the issue being sensitive. Murugan apologised for his writing because he could not adduce any evidence. Yet the peace meet is regarded as kangaroo court, despite government officials initiating it.

Many disputes in India are settled by informal talks — be it panchayat or community leaders’ intervention. The famous Manipal group dispute lingering for decades in High Courts and Supreme Court was finally solved by a spiritual leader — Veerendra Heggade. A sweeping generalisation is likely to undermine a valuable, cost effective social capital still functioning in many parts of India. The judiciary ought to be empathetic and issue guidelines on how peace meetings or panchayat should be held rather than ridiculing and trivialising them. In communal riots or caste wars, even police invariably resorts to peace meetings and solves issues. Are they too kangaroo courts?

Despite Murugan’s provocative writing against their women, the community gathered for the peace meet, which was held without violence. They need to be patted. In Rushdie and Vishwaroopam cases, the protesters succeeded in their aim by unleashing violence. Were the Tiruchengode people wrong then in holding peace meeting? The conclusion is self- evident: A helicopter view of the cases on ban on books in most cases and selective assertion and celebration of freedom in some other cases exposes political and constitutional hypocrisy that goes on in the name of liberalism and freedom of speech.

Even handed approach needed

A personal account: An educated lady professional from Tiruchengode, who begot a child by undertaking the Visakam ritual, asked me what those who had read Murugan’s book would think of her and her child. I had no answer. Nor can the liberals who celebrate Murugan’s book have any. Thousands of women in Tiruchengode areas suffer this humiliation — silently. I understand their pain. Lesson: A balanced and evenhanded constitutional approach to ban or permit objectionable expression is needed.


19 comments:

Raghunathan K said...

வரலாற்றுச் சம்பவங்களைச் சுற்றி கற்பனைக் கதை புனையப்படலாம். (உதாரணம் ஹே ராம் படம்). ஆனால் வரலாற்றுக் சம்பவங்களாகவே கற்பனை புனையப்படுவது தவறு. அதுவும் சமூகத்தின் ஒரு பிரிவினரை புண்படுத்துவதாக சம்பவங்களை அமைப்பது மிகப்பெரும் தவறு. எங்கோ ஓரிரண்டு இடங்களில் கதையில் குறிப்பிடப்பட்டுள்ள அத்தகைய நிகழ்வுகள் நடந்திருந்தாலும் அதையே அந்தச் சமூகத்தினரின் அடையாளமாகக் காட்ட முடியாது. மேலும், திரு பெருமாள் முருகனால் தகுந்த ஆதாரங்களைக் காட்ட முடியாததால் அவர் மன்னிப்பும் கேட்டுள்ளதால், பாதிக்கப்பட்டவர்களின் வேதனையையும் எதிர்ப்பையும் மனதில் கொண்டு அந்தப் புத்தகத்தை தடை செய்வதுதான் சரி. கருத்துச் சுதந்திரம் என்பது மற்றொருவரை புண்படுத்தும் விதமாக இருக்கக்கூடாது.

rk said...

Hindus and their valuse are the mat that gets troded by all and sundry. All in the name of freedom of expression. The fact as stated by Shri Gurumurthi is simple: the same judge and the liberals who celebrate this weird judgment, all went missing when Taslima Nasrin was hounded out of India. The selective outrage against their perceived sense of injustice against to freedom of speech only applies when it is Hinduism. They will not dare to say anything in defence of Hirshi Ali, Taslima Nasrin or Rushdie. They are COWARDS. Only alternative for Hindus is to become militant. As Krishna said, Dhanda got to be used when all else fails to protect Dharma. The judge in fact has done a favour to Hindus. Who knows, this might just be the trigger that hopefully ignite the docile Hindus into ACTION. My Thanks to Madam Ji and Shri Gurumurthy for their dharmic stand. We need more people like you both.

R.Ramanathan said...

I do agree to MR RK and Gurmurthy. Revival of the Kshatriya dharma is more essential than the tapas and patience of a Brahmana in this age. We need a combination of Brahma & kshatra like the famous Bhargava Rama AKA Parashurama, who could perform penance like a Brahmana and could slaughter his enemies ruthlessly like a Kshatriya.

The Veda never says that one should totally not become angry and be a stone. In fact there is the manyu sukta in the Rig Veda which is a praise of the anger of Indra, Mitra and Varuna. Also there is the famous war hymn in the yajur veda called the "Aprathi ratha"(Occurring in 4th kanda 3rd anuvaka of the Taittriya Samhita). I would even recommend those among the Hindus who can, to learn these two and incessantly chant these 2 suktas. Enough of ahimsa, titiksha etc etc. These things lead to nowhere in this age.

I pray that the Kshatriyas among the Hindus, regain their former might and Indra vritrahan give all Hindus courage both physical and mental.

"Udharshya magavan Aayudhanyutsatvanam maamakanam mahagumsi|
Udvrtrahan vajinamvajinam udratanam jayataam eetu goshaha"

"Oh Magavan take up weapons and encourage us to greatness.
Rise Oh killer of vritra on your chariot yoked with the finest war horses. May we roar with victory(Jayataam eetu goshaha)"

jayasree said...

Dear Mr Ramanathan,

I think bringing here in the context of the issue, the need for Kshatriya dharma as a counter is not relevant. In today's world, in this kind of society based issues, proper arbitrator and meaningful rules of law are the need of the hour. As an arbitrator, the judge had erred in my opinion.

jayasree said...

Mr Gurumurthy's interview to The Hindu on this issue is giving more clarity on how this issue should have been treated by the High Court. It is reproduced below.

From
http://m.thehindu.com/news/national/tamil-nadu/an-interview-with-noted-columnist-and-commentator-s-gurumurthy/article8831637.ece

In defence of the opposition to ‘Madhorubhagan’
Updated: July 11, 2016 12:37 IST | Sruthisagar Yamunan

Liberal sections of society have hailed the recent Madras High Court judgment upholding Tamil writer Perumal Murugan’s freedom of expression and ruling that the state cannot allow groups claiming to be offended by his novel Madhorubhagan to curtail his freedom in the name of maintaining law and order. However, noted columnist and commentator S. Gurumurthy has come out with a critique of the judgment, questioning its legal basis and logic. Sruthisagar Yamunan met him to understand why. Excerpts from his interview with Mr. Gurumurthy.

What is your primary issue with the Perumal Murugan case verdict?

The verdict is wrong on facts. Basically because the writer himself has said in his preface that he has confirmed what has written in the novel: that this practice was going on in Tiruchengode. His withdrawing this comment later does not make it fiction. How did the court come to the conclusion that this withdrawal makes it retroactively fiction? Under what law and under what precedent they are saying this I am not sure. The High Court has not given a proper rationale for why it accepted the argument that he now thinks it was not based on research. His was not just a fiction about a couple but an account of an allegedly prevalent practice.

In essence, this means his characters were fictional but the structure was based on research. My view is he was wrong on facts.

The second point is, the High Court has said this could be about any people anywhere. How did Tiruchengode come in? First, the Kongu community is around that area. Two, Mr. Murugan had drawn attention to the ritual of going around that rock. ‘Sami Kudutha Pillai’ (God-given child) is an existing adage there.

Next, the Madhorubagan idol is on the book’s cover. A competent counsel was not employed to bring these facts to the notice of the court. The court needs assistance of branded counsels. But all of them were appearing for the liberals, writer and publisher. The person concerned had to be persuaded to come to court. All instrumentalities in India are being drawn into the vortex of liberalism, including courts. To take a position otherwise would be deemed illiberal. This overall thinking is affecting institutional independence. Women, the principal affected parties here, were not heard in this court. The court should have said we want some women of that area who practice this ritual to come and say what their opinion is. You charge them with carrying the illegitimate children of third parties but you don’t want to hear them. This judgment has created a huge misapprehension. It has to be withdrawn and the case reheard.

One aspect you have not mentioned is how the court viewed the so-called outrage. It took place four years after the book was released. The court felt this was orchestrated. Should the court bow down to such faceless protests?

Is there any evidence to say there was no outrage with knowledge of the contents of the book? That the book was released years back doesn’t mean they know about the contents of the book. Were there any popular reviews that discussed the controversial parts of the book in detail?

jayasree said...

There were lots of reviews and the book even got awards.

There might have been awards and public functions for the release. A book getting released has no meaning. The people did not act at that point because they did not know what was written in the book. I have personally interacted with people of that area. They said they came to know about the contents only later. If there was a political party or a leader, let’s say some one like Dr. Ramadoss, then we can allege orchestration. So definitely, it took sometime for the people to assemble in the absence of a visible community leadership.

But isn’t that worse? That is what the court terms as a faceless mob.

No. Only when it is faceless it means it is spontaneous. There was no Hardik Patel here. And it is not just one community that participated in the protests. Vellala Gounders and Dalits, including Arunthathiyars, agitated. Most of the newspapers have not reported on these facts and that it was a societal protest. What Perumal Murugan had basically written is that the so called vagabonds and untouchables indulge in sexual orgy. But the women of one community are hurt. Women are the pride of any community or family. We cannot deny this. We are not living in an Anglo­-Saxon world. Here we live in a community and it has a certain value even constitutionally, and women are part of the community. Liberalism won’t stand if it ignores sentiments of the people. We cannot have liberalism at the cost of the people’s sentiments. Except hurting sentiments, this book has not achieved anything. These people have done nothing illegal. All that they have done is pray and this novel trivialises their belief.

But the book makes a strong case against certain ideas of what constitutes womanhood and masculinity and the resultant effect on the people. In that way it served an important social cause.

That could have been achieved without reference to this fictitious sexual orgy and without mentioning the place and the community. Why do you zero in on a place, a god, a particular community and a ritual?

Maybe because he was from the community and it was immediate to him?

Then you leave it to the community to decide what to do with the book. If I belong to the community I should have the right to trivialise it. Is this how the courts should look at this issue? By no standards of any jurisprudence is this judgment valid unless the women are heard. This fictional novel served no social purpose. In fact, you should be more careful when writing fiction. Fact is a defence against defamation. Fiction cannot be.

Some could argue the popular morality you are alluding to is not consistent either. For example, how is the relationship between Lord Krishna and Gopis or between Draupadi and Pandavas acceptable but what happens in Madhorubagan is not? Will you support if the community seeks a ban on Bhagavatam?

So long as you do not regard Bhagavatam as history, there is no problem.

How do you regard it?

That is what I am saying. Now you have classified it as mythology. There is no continuity of the community. So long as people do not associate with it and say these are my ancestors,….in fact ancestry is the most important.

But the Yadavas do.

Yes, they do. But the important thing is Yadavas do not reside in one place for them to defend themselves. Nobody says the Krishna­-Gopi relationship is amoral because they are taken to be Bhaktas (devotees). The interpretation is also that.

jayasree said...

I can also interpret it as amoral.

Correct, but provided there is a Krishna. You cannot equate a relationship between man and God and a relationship between man and woman.

But Madhorubagan does the same thing. The child is “God given” and not that of the man you have sex with.

I agree. But he has not ennobled the relationship. There is no Krishna. The novel trivialises the woman. It is not a God-given child. It is given by somebody. I would like the court to say both these things are same. God is in a different position. We may even criticise God. In fact, Rama is criticised for sending Sita to forest and for killing Vali. But Rama is God. Only in this country you have the right to criticise God. People are accepted as they are provided they are revered. There is no reverence of any kind in this novel. Do you equate a vagabond giving a child to Krishna?

So you are essentially saying this is acceptable when a person if elevated to divine status, and not otherwise.

Unless you say that the person donating the sperm is divine. But you are equating the sperm donors to those giving it in a laboratory. Sentiments are not dealt with logic. You cannot argue with a million people following a tradition that this is the logic. Where sentiment comes don’t bring in logic just as an intellectual. Man is partly emotional and partly sentimental. How much of your life can you rationally explain? When sentiment of the people is involved, logic has to be moderated.

Should sentiments then be allowed to trump law and rights?

No. It has not done any harm to you. I can understand if the sentiment is to kill a child of my neighbour to get a child for myself, then that is not acceptable since it is against the society. Here, I am just going to pray. You are giving an interpretation without facts. Why did Mr. Murugan not stand by his research? Why did he not continue with his stand that yes the novel is factual? So you are basically castigating people for their faith.

Do you agree with the court’s observation that the society was more liberal in the older times?

Let me ask you one thing: Are the courts liberal? Where was liberalism in the ADM Jabalpur case during the Emergency? [In that 1976 case, the Supreme Court ruled that no person can apply for habeas corpus during Emergency] I don’t think the courts could stand up and say we are liberal. You have never been liberal when you were supposed to be liberal. You are liberal when a liberal regime is there. When the regime is illiberal you have also been so. So I do not want to give a certificate to the courts that they are liberal.

When do you think taking offence is okay and when is it not?

A sentimental country also respects each other’s sentiments. It is in this mutual respect that you have peace in this country. If there is a sentiment that offends the sentiment of others, then the State or courts should intervene. When people are having their own life and beliefs and I don’t disturb others, then I feel they be allowed to live peacefully without interference. I think this judgment has not been delivered with proper briefing.

rk said...

Madam Ji, You wrote" A sentimental country also respects each other’s sentiments. It is in this mutual respect that you have peace in this country. If there is a sentiment that offends the sentiment of others, then the State or courts should intervene. "
This is not happening in India and will not happen any time soon. There is absolutely no respect to Hindu's sentiments for close to a century. Hindus do not even have control over their place of worship. I recently saw a video where the cops in boots beating the devotees in a temple. Where was the outrage? I repeat, no government or the courts will come to rescue Hindu's sentiments. The reason is because Hindus are docile and lack spine. Until and unless they take their issues and deal them with iron fists, nothing ever will change. Period. We all can sit quietly and continue living at the mercy every crook and rascals hoping that one day they all will turn around for better. Or take matters in own hands. This does not mean restoring to violence. How about a protest march for a starter? (I am not sitting and advising people what they should do because people in return will ask me what I have done except mouse clicking on the net. I have involved myself in the past, at least financially, to prevent conversion of Hindus and enabling few Christians returning to their mother religion. I also actively support Ekal Vidlaya's ruralschools financially. This is not to blow my own trumpet but to clear up the matter.)

A Senior Citizen said...

Respected JSji

A differing / different view point!

http://www.ndtv.com/opinion/the-landmark-verdict-in-favour-of-tamil-writer-murugan-1431475?pfrom=home-topstories

Hinduism has survived many onslaughts in the past and it has survived strikingly and come out stronger. Many tried in vain to inflict maximum damage but they could not succeed. This being so, we need not be unduly perturbed over these developments. Hinduism is more than a religion - it is a way of life. Hence we will come over this too in a very short time.

Regards

Dr G.Raghavan

rk said...

I am also a senior citizen of 67 years. What worries me is the attitude of many well intentioned Hindus that Dharma will truimph eventually . Bharatha varsha extended from Iran to Cambodia . Now it is one third of what it was. All is not well and this need to be acknowledged. Hindu population is shrinking and this is an undeniable fact. Either we proactively do something to protect our dharma or face near certainty that by year 2050 there will not be anything to protect. I have heard this well meant though poorly thought out view that all will be well. History tells us otherwise. Let us follow lord Krishna's advise to Arjuna: Get up and fight Partha.

R.Ramanathan said...

Madam by Kshatriya dharma i did not mean the return of Monarchy. I mean we should learn to be aggressive if needed. This kind of attitude is needed. Also we need a very deep knowledge of our scriptures. A real study of the original stuff. Not just study of some 2nd hand books written by people who just want to make a living out of it. Reading the Artha shastra of chanakya gives a very great insight as to how to practically confront enemies. Also Vishnu Sharma's Pancha Tantra is a good book. All these books show how knowledgeable ancient hindus were in statecraft and warfare in addition to having a deep knowledge of the Veda and its allied areas

Going further, the situation and the laws are going to be more hostile to the Hindus. I for one surely do not believe in statements like the one's made by Dr Raghavan. We survived because we had tall leaders or kings like Chatrapati Shivaji, Krishna Devaraya, Vidyaranya who was a shankarcharya in the shringeri peetam, but was a great organizer and created the Vijaya Nagara kingdom etc etc. All of them understood the real dangers of the Abrahmism's and acted accordingly. Without these people we would be either be Christians or Muslims. Presently we do not have tall leaders like the one's i mentioned and all of them are morons who cannot be trusted

So quaint thoughts like "Hinduism is more than a religion - it is a way of life. Hence we will come over this too in a very short time." have no meaning if we do not take charge of the situation now and act with military decisiveness. This was what i meant in my comments

R.Ramanathan said...

Just as a sample, please read the article here. This is a must read and it gives a good overview of how ancient hindus scientifically followed statecraf

https://manasataramgini.wordpress.com/2016/06/28/a-commentary-on-the-vairin-s-and-the-like-of-vi%e1%b9%a3%e1%b9%87usarmans-tradition/

The article discuss how the Panchatantra classifies enmity.It is this kind of understanding that help's us to formulate clear strategies against the enemies. We need to absorb these things. As an example,a gross misunderstanding of the dictum "Vasudaiva kutumbakam" has caused havoc on our country. Please read this link

https://indianrealist.wordpress.com/2009/01/25/the-hoax-of-vasudhaiva-kutumbakam-the-whole-world-is-one-family/

May be many already know it too.

jayasree said...

Dear Mr rk,

The comments following the link from The Hindu on Mr Gurumurthy's interview are his and not mine. As such the passage starting with " A sentimental country..." was told by Mr Gurumurthy.

I agree with your views in the rest of the comment. Please don't think its 'trumpeting'. People must know how and in what ways others are contributing to the cause of Sanatana Dharma. Your service to Dharma, though you are away from the country, is truly commendable. My pranams to you.

jayasree said...

Dear Dr Raghavan,
The link you have quoted is not the one and only of that category. All the magazines and all the writers of MSM wrote like that only. Exceptions were Mr Gurumurthy and Cho Ramasamy. Perhaps among bloggers mine was the lone voice. While everyone of the MSM who hailed the judgement on the pretext of free speech added a Hindu fundamentalist colour to the opposing voices, I focused on the human right issue. The judge must answer whether it didn't harm the dignity of countless women of countless centuries who undertook that prayer.

jayasree said...

Dear Mr Ramanathan,

The talk of aggression in the context of the idea of this blog post looked irrelevant to me.Though I agree with your views, I wish to say that I focused in this post on the lapse on the part of the judge in taking cognizance of the humiliation suffered by the women folk.

jayasree said...

On Vasudhaiva Kutimbakam, I have already written a post on August 2009 which can be read here:- http://jayasreesaranathan.blogspot.in/2009/08/vasudhaiva-kutumbakam-as-state-policy.html

R.Ramanathan said...

Dear Madam,
What i meant is, this is not the first time this humiliation has been suffered by Hindu Men/Women. So what i was discussing includes and also goes much beyond the context of your post.

I will quote one more discussion i had yesterday on this article with my aunts and other relatives. Everybody says "Vidu daa, Suryana paarthu naay kolacha suryanuka asingam? Mallaandu paduthu yechal tuppina tupparavan moonjila dhaan vandu vizhum". All useless platitude and hyperbole. Then the topic moved to Christian conversions, Islamic Jihad etc. I tried to impress upon them the dangers of these things to our society and the need to cultivate aggression. In return what i got was again a bunch of nonsense like "ahimsa paramo dharma", Tirukkurals extolling "Kollamai" etc. How do you think we should deal with these people?.

jayasree said...

Dear Mr Ramanathan,

All around us we hear the same thing that you have written. This shows what is required is not aggression but awareness. Awareness about these issues is the first step to shake up people from ignorance and slumber. Then comes aggressiveness. But in today's socio- political scenario, getting aggressive would not yield positive results for us. We will be only branded as fundamentalists. The entire media set-up and vested interests backed up by political class is so massive that we can not stand up to their might. In that scenario, judiciary is the only recourse. We must produce clever and courageous lawyers on the one side and writers of the same class on the other. Through SM and whatever source to convey, we have to spread this awareness. On the other side we have to have lawyers who have the mind to take up these cases and fight them out in the court of law. Subramanian Swamy could show some effect in this regard, but he is maverick and self centred. There are umpteen number of lawyers on the other side and none or a very few on our side to speak for us. So the solution that I can see is to produce more lawyers and writers to support our cause. My blogs are what I can do within my capability.

Even the astika information that we write here and the kind of articles like the above one and the ones that you have written before (eg:- "Brazen attempt by a Christian Father to convert a Vedic scholar – reader Ramanathan recalls his horrible experience." http://jayasreesaranathan.blogspot.in/2012/12/brazen-attempt-by-christian-father-to.html) are well taken and circulated by readers. Using the SM what we are doing here is also a war on enemies of Dharma.

Like yourself I am also finding the same talks in the physical environment around me. My only source of venting out my thoughts is my blog. Like minded people read them and reinforce their faith in their own like minded thoughts. At our level that is what we can achieve - of spreading and adding strength to others who think like us.

rk said...

I agree with Mr Ramanathan whole heartily. I just read the news now that TN govt is appealing against the acquittal of Kanachi Acharaya Ji. Where is the outcry from Hindus? Or from BJP? Amit Sha said sometime back that the arrest and the trail of Acharaya was politically motivated. Will the BJP have some spine now and call for demonstration against Jaya's govt? Or at least make some statement in supporting Kanchi Acharya? He is 80 years old and the last time, the fabricated case against Him went on for 14 years. Will Jaya take action against any Mullahs or Christian clergy in the same manner? Maddani, the Coimbatore Islamic bomber was treated like a Royal in the prison. Pedophile Christian clergy go scot free. As I said earlier, we are the mat that everyone walks over with impunity. I cannot blame unawareness on the part of Hindus for the present mess and denigration of our Dharma. It is absolute laziness, intrinsic Tamasic spirit, the root cause of our dhiminess. Majority of Hindus do not care for their religion. This is an irrefutable fact. Sometime, I feel like throwing in the towel and get on with my own life. I am ashamed of the cowardly Hindus, especially of TN.