On Husain, Khajuraho and moral policing
I wrote a follow-up comment on Jo’s blog following my earlier comment� which I feel is worth reproducing in full here:
Jo,
First a clarification (which I think is very important):
I am all for freedom of expression and as I have maintained several times in the past, I label myself as a liberal who is prepared to fight for the ideals of freedom, tolerance and respect for others
To make it absolutely clear: Although I do feel offended by certain paintings of Husain 1] this is a free country and Shri Husain is free to paint what he wishes to 2] I absolutely and unequivocally condemn the death threats and threats of violence in this situation (just as I would condemn the fatwa against Salman Rushdie) and 3] if certain people are upset about it, they have recourse to judicial means.
Now to the main argument (and this is not really about just the one painting that you have on your blog).
What I cannot understand is the inconsistency in the stand of the government (the cartoon controversy comes to mind), in the mind of the artist (did Shri Husain defend the Danish newspaper editor? not as far as I know although I am willing to be corrected on this) and in the minds of various defenders of “freedom of expression”.
I think it is really very simple: Either you are FOR “freedom of expression” – in which case you would also show the Mohammed cartoons on your site along with the Husain painting (- or desist from showing both out of deference to popular sensibilities) OR you are FOR “limited/restrained freedom” in which case you will probably agree that Husain’s paintings are sometimes over the top.
I am not a right-wing Hindutva-wadi (in the sense that you imply) and I cannot support their threats of personal violence against Shri Husain (or the moral policing by certain groups that you refer to – the Richard Gere-Shilpa Shetty controversy comes to mind).
In fact, the essence of Hindu traditions (as I have written before on your blog) is to hold all alternative viewpoints in equal respect and not consider them as blasphemous or sacrilegious. So a true Hindu may be offended by Shri Husain’s paintings but will not call for his death just because of that. Further, a true “Hindu fundamentalist” will (i) have belief in the one-ness of all life and (ii) hold that in spite of diversity and external dissimilarity, all beings are one, all life is sacred and all creatures are part of one eternal truth and (iii) be tolerant and respectful of others. The “Hindutva-vadis” you mention are far removed from this.
As regards dieties being painted in the nude, let me try and explain:
Hindu temples are not just places of meditation and solemn rituals. Temples have historically (and even today) been one of the important centres of social and cultural activity in any village, town or city. This is important so that one can understand the context and appreciate that not every sculpture or icon in a temple belongs to a diety.
The Khajuraho sculptures that people routinely refer to, are not those of Gods and Goddesses but of courtiers, courtesans, royals and ordinary mortals. Please go and visit if you have not done so far (or if you do not believe me).
Bear in mind also that the Khajuraho tyemples were built by Chandela kings who were heavily influenced by (and were followers of) the Tantric cult. This is not the best place to get into the complexities of that belief system (and it is widely mis-understood) but that partially explains the sexual postures on the outside of temples.
Yet, to be clear, the temples do not contain sexual themes inside the Temple premises or near the deity(-ies).
The erotic carvings themselves are a small proportion of the overall art (they obviously get disproportionate attention) and the idols of Shiva, Durga and Vishnu avatar are clothed.
Hope this clarifies things somewhat.
Related Posts:
M F Husain in the news…again
Shantanu,
Dont even waste your breath explaining your stand to non entities like Jo. Firstly hypocrites like Jo blow hot and cold if mohammad’s cartoons are published in Denmark and they stall parliament and hold rallies in delhi. But if a joker like M F Hussein in the twilight of his career wants desperate publicity by painting Hindu goddesses in the nude they harp about free press, personal freedom and a whole lot of bull crap.
Even explaining your stand to Jo is a wasted effort. You really think Jo dint know all this before you explained yourself. Some nitwits prefer to be oblivious of relaity in their own cucoon of ignorant mental retardation.
These people and things in life are best ignored. Even crediting such non entities with a rejoinder is disgusting.
I agree Dr. Durya.
Jo and all band is converted lot. They have heart full of hate as they are not a part of this great Hinduism. Sorry for them. There thinking will never get wider to understand a simple meaning of what is extremists? Water in their stomach will not even ripple if real extremist rip the train but when Hindus only threat they get disturb by the fact that Hidus are becomeing stronger. They want Hindus of olden age, who allowed to destroy thir temples and civilisation. They want us to be – dont speak, dont hear and dont smell the foul play of iresponsible religion of theirs.
Who the hell is this JO??????
visited his blog, substandard and biased baseless writing. it seems like he is specialising in anti-hindu writing. for him, peoples talking the word hindu or hindutva are fundamentalists. Its better to ignore these impotent fellows. He doesnt know the cultural values of our country and he is least bothered about other serious threats faced by our society. only thing he is telling always is about hindu fundamentalism. Yeah we cannot expect much from a person like him, its not his problem…. I dont know the reason behind his hindu hatred. let him go hell. why we are giving un necessary importance to these third rate blogs promoted only with the object of earning comments by writing nonsense. these peoples wants to increase their adsense revenue by increasing the hit to his blog by creating controversy by writing bullshit. anyway I apreciate shantanu and indian for their nice replies…
thank you.
Good post Shantanu.
I really think that enlightning people about Hinduism/Hindutva is the need of the hour. So many people including the Jos of this world start getting all sorts of wrong ideas by the mere mention of Hindutva and in that sense your sharing of views about the real notions through this blog might atleast clear some minds.
Noticed “www.satyameva-jayate.org”!! So are you now hosting independently?
DrSurya, Indian, Nikky and Manoj: Thanks a lot for your comments and for your support.
I think the “debate” with Jo is not moving in any constructive direction so I am not going to comment on it any more. I feel some people just dont have the concept of motherland in the sense of this shloka: “Janani Janmabhumishcha Swargadapi Gari Asi” – which is why they find it difficult to understand how someone can be hurt by derogatory references to “Bharat Mata” or “Matrubhoomi”.
Instead, as many of you have suggested, I think it would be more worthwhile to spread awareness about the true nature of “Hinduism” and our rich traditions and heritage.
Thanks.
I appreciete Shantanu’s view point that why did Chandela’s bild that building as after Budhhism the “Vairgya” led to reduction in libido & population was on decline?
The statues and carvings of Khajuraho
The Khajuraho temples do not contain sexual or erotic art inside the temple or near the deities; however, some external carvings bear erotic art. Also, some of the temples that have two layers of walls have small erotic carvings on the outside of the inner wall.
There are many interpretations of the erotic carvings. They portray that, for seeing the deity, one must leave his or her sexual desires outside the temple. They also show that divinity, such as the deities of the temples, is pure like the atman, which is not affected by sexual desires and other characteristics of the physical body. It has been suggested that these suggest tantric sexual practices.
Meanwhile, the external curvature and carvings of the temples depict humans, human bodies, and the changes that occur in human bodies, as well as facts of life. Some 10% of the carvings contain sexual themes; those reportedly do not show deities, they show sexual activities between people.
The rest depict the everyday life of the common Indian of the time when the carvings were made, and of various activities of other beings. For example, those depictions show women putting on makeup, musicians, potters, farmers, and other folks. Those mundane scenes are all at some distance from the temple deities.
A common misconception is that, since the old structures with carvings in Khajuraho are temples, the carvings depict sex between deities.
Source:
http://www.liveindia.com/khajuraho/index.html
Satyameva Jayate Nanritam (Truth alone triumphs, not falsehood).
Bharat
=====
Just for the reference, check the various ‘works’ of Mr M F Hussain shown at http://www.hindujagruti.org/activities/campaigns/national/mfhussain-campaign/
(ignore the comments/views shown with paintings if you may want.)
Bookmarking this for reading later: MF HUSSAIN:- Secular Holy cow or Market-Driven Peddler? by U. Narayana Das
From MF Husain conferred Qatar nationality: Report (emphasis mine):
India’s most celebrated artist MF Husain has been offered Qatar nationality, according to a report in The Hindu.
The report said that Husain was “Honoured by Qatar nationality†but deeply saddened by his enforced exile and the need now to give up the citizenship of the land of his birth, which he has lovingly and secularly celebrated in his art covering a period of over seven decades.
Indian government does not allow dual citizenship, therefore, Husain will have to give up his Indian passport if he decides to take up Qatar citizenship.
The report also said that Husain did not apply for Qatar nationality and that it was conferred upon him at the instance of the modernising emirate’s ruling family.
A question from Sanjay’s email:
Would it be creative freedom or secular or liberal if a Hindu artist were to paint Muhammad or depict Allah? And in the nude?
Would N Ram have the same comments to make? Why not?
Ref: N Ram on M F Husain’s new nationality
=>
““Honoured by Qatar nationality†but deeply saddened by his enforced exile.. “
=>
Isn’t this exile self-enforced to avoid appearing in the courts?
=>
“He travels freely except to India, where he faces legal harassment and physical threats, with the system impotent and not committed to enabling his return.”
=>
Legal harassment? So in that case, the laws need to be changed. But that would hurt the Islamist cause in India, so in N. Ram’s view, following the law becomes “legal harassment”. So much for respecting the rule of law.
=>
“It is ironical that a country whose religious art often portrays nudity and even overt sexuality, as in the case of the Khajuraho sculptures and the murals and frescoes of south Indian temples, has grown so intolerant as to drive into permanent exile its most famous artist. “
=>
This most famous artist also withdrew from circulation, his film “Meenaxi” when some Islamists objected to it. Unfortunately, nary a peep was heard from the intelligentsia, and I doubt that N. Ram will have the guts to take up that issue of censorship. It’s best to sweep it under the carpet, while bursting one’s lungs about “Hindutva fascists”.
And religious art portraying nudity does not imply that the gods and goddesses are also displayed in nude.
‎”The minister (Sh Kapil Sibal) in a hurriedly convened briefing told reporters that the government would look at ways of curbing “blasphemous” content which could hurt the religious sentiments of a large section of communities in India.”
http://bit.ly/tmwGzC
“I fought almost all of his (MF Husain’s) legal battles while I was a lawyer.
There is nothing ugly about his paintings”
http://bit.ly/sHrdur
…
हम करें तो बà¥à¤²à¤¾à¤¸à¤«à¥‡à¤®à¥€, तà¥à¤® करो तो xxx…
***
Here’s Sh Sibal’s double-speak:
““What do you think about these derogatory pictures of the Prophet Mohammed..
Anybody will feel outraged. The government of India does not believe in censorship. But sensitivity and feelings of different communities cannot be allowed to be hurt” http://bit.ly/skQwxj
From “Were Hindus right to oppose M. F. Husain’s art, or is legitimate artistic freedom being trodden upon?” by Koenraad Elst (from Hindu Voice UK’s July 2009 issue; emphasis added):
…it is simply untrue that goddesses are ever depicted (in India) while satisfying themselves with the help of a tiger’s tail, the way Husain depicts Durga. As for the more modest nudes, even these are far from the rule in Hindu iconography.
In the Hindu worldview, kama or eroticism has a place among the finalities of human life. This may well be the idea behind the depiction of some sexual scenes on the outside walls of Khajuraho temples. However, it is not because the Khajuraho buildings are temples that they depict sex between deities. These sculptures are only on the outside, not inside the abode of the deity, and they depict scenes from all aspects of human life. They send the message that one should always have the deity as the central point in one’s life even though one is engaged in worldly activities. About one tenth of them are of a sexual nature,a and none of these involves characters recognizable as Saraswati, Lakshmi or other deities. Inside the Khajuraho temples, the idols of Shiva, Nandi, Durga, the incarnation of Vishnu and Lakshmi etc. are clothed normally. All over India, deities have been shown in temples as described in the scriptures and normally no idols of deities are shown nude or in sexual positions.
There are arguable exceptions. One is the Tantric deity-couples, frequent in Tibet but rare in India, who may be shown in a dignified copulation posture, not doggie-style or lying down missionary-style as pornographers would prefer, but the god sitting in lotus posture with the goddesses sitting on his lap embracing him. I am the happy owner of a statue of Ganesha in copulation with a female partner, which incidentally gives the lie to Paul Courtright’s thesis of Ganesha as a symbol of phallic limpness. None of Husain’s contested paintings even dimly resembles these icons.
The second exception is the icons of naked saints, not gods, who observed a vow of nudity as part of their ascetic discipline. This chiefly concerns Mahavirs Jina and some of his followers. But obviously there cannot be a trace of sensuality, let alone Husain’s perversity, in those depictions of celibate saints.
In an open letter to Lord Desai, Hindu Human Rights also explained that Hindus were “offended at his depiction of Draupadi as naked, as in Hindu tradition it is Lord Krishna who saves her modesty in the Maharabhataâ€. Effectively, in a central episode of the most influential text of Hinduism, the Mahabharata¸ Draupadi is threatened with nudity as an act of humiliation, and the deified hero Krishna is credited with saving her from this shame. Husain identifies with the Kaurava rascals by taking her clothes off after all. The very least that the epic story teaches is that ancient Hindus were not so carefree about nudity after all.
At this point I have to correct a position I had taken in an internet discussion after a naked depiction of goddess Saraswati by Husian had caused some commotion. I had pointed out that Saraswati had been introduced in Japan by the Buddhists under the name Benzai-ten, and that this goddess does get depicted naked. Indeed, a naked sculpture of Benzai-ten is shown in many books of Buddhist or Japanese art history (e.g Louis Frederic: Les Dieux du Bouddhisme, Flammarion, Paris 1992, p.223 ff.). However, that sculpture is not functioning idol in a temple but located in a museum. In a temple, such a naked sculpture is clothed every morning, and worshippers only see her clothed. This practice of clothing a sculpture is not uncommon in Hindu-Buddhist devotionalism, e.g even the giant Bamian Buddhas in Afghanistan used to be clothed. The Japanese are less prudish than the Indians, but even they worship their deities in clothed form. Likewise, even the impudent Greeks depicted only Aphrodite, the goddess of erotic love, in the nude; but Artemis, Athena, Demeter and other goddesses are always shown covered.
*********
P.S. One important clarification by Sandhya Jain-ji: