Sunday, January 22, 2012
Comments posted on THE HINDU website over article: Salman Rushdie and India’s new theocracy by Praveen Swamy:
Praveen Swami says: India's secular state is in a state of slow-motion collapse. For the color blind, it is not visible that at least for 200 million Muslims, a good 15 to 18% of the Indian population, India's secular state has already collapsed as soon as it was formed. And it is the likes of Praveen Swami that were foremost in its collapse. If sensitivities of only one section is the benchmark for India's secularism and democracy, how long that fact can remain hidden from the world and how long that facade can be maintained. The stark fact is that in India, 'Secularism' was dead on arrival.
Ghulam Muhammed (Mumbai)
------------
Opinion » Lead
January 21, 2012
Salman Rushdie & India's new theocracy Praveen Swami
AP Salman Rushdie
India's secular state is in a state of slow-motion collapse. The contours of a new theocratic dystopia are already evident.
In 300CE, the historian and cleric, Eusebius, fearfully recorded the rise of a new “demon-inspired heresy.” “From innumerable long-extinct blasphemous heresies,” he wrote, the new religion's founder “had made a patchwork of them and brought from Persia a deadly poison with which he infected our own world.”
Manichaeism, a new religion which posited an eternal struggle between good and evil, had dramatically expanded across the ancient world. Less than half-a-century after its rise, though, the faith had been all but annihilated. Bahram II massacred its followers in Persia; in 296, the Roman emperor, Diocletian, decreed its leaders “condemned to the fire with their abominable scriptures.” Khagan Boku Tekin, the Uighur king, made Manichaeism the state religion giving it a home — but even this last redoubt collapsed in 840.
Eusebius' own Christian faith, by contrast, flourished after it won imperial patronage: the word of god grows best in fields watered by the state's pelf, and ploughed by the state's swords.
Salman Rushdie's censoring-out from the ongoing literary festival in Jaipur will be remembered as a milestone that marked the slow motion disintegration of India's secular state. Islamist clerics first pressured the state to stop Mr. Rushdie from entering India; on realising he could not stop, he was scared off with a dubious assassination threat. Fear is an effective censor: the writers Hari Kunzru and Amitava Kumar, who sought to read out passages from The Satanic Verses as a gesture of solidarity, were stopped from doing so by the festival's organisers.
In a 1989 essay, Ahmad Deedat, an influential neo-fundamentalist who starred in the first phases of the anti-Rushdie campaign, hoped the writer would “die a coward's death, a hundred times a day, and eventually when death catches up with him, may he simmer in hell for all eternity.” He thanked Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi for his “sagacious” decision to ban The Satanic Verses. Now, another Indian Prime Minister has helped further Mr. Deedat's dream.
The betrayal of secular India in Jaipur, though, is just part of a far wider treason: one that doesn't have to do with Muslim clerics alone, but a state that has turned god into a public-sector undertaking.
Underwriting faith
Few Indians understand the extent to which the state underwrites the practice of their faith. The case of the Maha Kumbh Mela, held every 12 years at Haridwar, Allahabad, Ujjain and Nashik, is a case in point. The 2001 Mela in Allahabad, activist John Dayal has noted in a stinging essay, involved state spending of over Rs.1.2 billion — 12,000 taps that supplied 50.4 million litres of drinking water; 450 kilometres of electric lines and 15,000 streetlights; 70,000 toilets; 7,100 sanitation workers, 11 post offices and 3,000 phone lines; 4,000 buses and trains.
That isn't counting the rent that ought to have been paid on the 15,000 hectares of land used for the festival — nor the salaries of the hundreds of government servants administering the Kumbh.
Last year, the Uttar Pradesh police sought a staggering Rs.2.66 billion to pay for the swathe of electronic technologies, helicopters and 30,000 personnel which will be needed to guard the next Mela in 2013. There are no publicly available figures on precisely how much the government will spend on other infrastructure — but it is instructive to note that an encephalitis epidemic that has claimed over 500 children's lives this winter drew a Central aid of just Rs.0.28 billion.
The State's subsidies to the Kumbh Mela, sadly, aren't an exception. Muslims wishing to make the Haj pilgrimage receive state support; so, too, do Sikhs travelling to Gurdwaras of historic importance in Pakistan. Hindus receive identical kinds of largesse, in larger amounts. The state helps underwrite dozens of pilgrimages, from Amarnath to Kailash Mansarovar. Early in the last decade, higher education funds were committed to teaching pseudo-sciences like astrology; in 2001, the Gujarat government even began paying salaries to temple priests.
In 2006, the Delhi government provided a rare official acknowledgment that public funds are routinely spent on promoting god. In a study of its budget expenditure, it said it provided “religious services, i.e. grants for religious purpose including repairs and maintenance of ancient temples, contribution to religious institutions and for memorial of religious leaders like Guru Nanak Birth Anniversary, Dussehra Exhibitions [sic., throughout]”.
The study did not reveal precisely how much had been spent on what kind of religious promotion. It did, however, note that spending on a broad category called “cultural, recreational and religious activities” had increased steadily — from Rs.526.5 million in 2003-2004, to Rs.751 million in 2006-2007. In 2006-2007, these kinds of activities accounted for 0.74% of Delhi's overall budget — ahead of, say, environmental protection (0.17%), mining and manufacturing (0.59%), and civil defence (0.12%).
India's clerics, regardless of their faith, have long been intensely hostile to state regulation of religion — witness the country's failure to rid itself of the faith-based laws that govern our personal lives. In the matter of the perpetuation of their religion, though, the state is a welcome ally.
The contours of the bizarre theocratic dystopia that could replace the secular state are already evident. The state tells us we may not read the Satanic Verses, or Aubrey Menen's irreverent retelling of the Ramayana; it chooses not to prosecute the vandals who block stores from stocking D.N. Jha's masterful Holy Cow, James Laine's history of Shivaji, or Paul Courtright's explorations of oedipal undertones in Hindu mythology.
Regulation on what we eat, drink
It doesn't end there: the state regulates, on god's behalf, what we may eat or drink — witness the proliferation of bans on beef, and proscriptions on alcohol use in so-called holy cities. It ensures children pray in morning assemblies funded by public taxes, provides endowments for denomination schools and funds religious functions. It pays for prayers before state functions, and promotes pseudo-sciences like astrology. And, yes: it censors heretics, like M.F. Husain or Mr. Rushdie.
Even the rule of law has been contracted-out to god's agents. Last week, a self-appointed Sharia court issued orders to expel Christian priests from Jammu and Kashmir; neither the police, the judicial system nor political parties stepped in. In many north Indian States, local caste and religious tyrannies have brutally punished transgressions of religious laws. In 2010, the National Crime Records Bureau data show, a staggering 178 people were killed for practising witchcraft.
For decades now, Indian liberals have shied away from confronting theism, choosing instead to collaborate with the marketing of allegedly tolerant traditions. Back in 2005, the Human Resource Development Ministry set up a committee to consider how state-funded schools could best promote tolerance. Lingadevaru Halemane, a linguist and playwright, made clear the committee was chasing a chimera. “These days,” he argued, “whichever religion dominates in the area, they open the schools.” Local culture, he said bluntly, “will be dominated by the dominant group.”
Spurious secularism
Leaving aside the question of whether India's religious traditions are in fact tolerant — a subject on which the tens of thousands of victims of communal and caste violence might have interesting opinions — this spurious secularism has served in the main to institutionalise and sharpen communal boundaries. It has also allowed clerics to exercise influence over state policy — insulating themselves from a secularising world.
The strange thing is this: India's people, notwithstanding their religiosity, aren't the ones pushing the state to guard god's cause.
India's poor send their children to private schools hoping they will learn languages and sciences, not prayer. Indian politics remains focussed on real-world issues: no party campaigns around seeking more funds for mosque domes or temple elephants.
Eight years ago, scholar Meera Nanda argued that “India is a country that most needs a decline in the scope of religion in civil society for it to turn its constitutional promise of secular democracy into a reality.” “But,” she pointed out, “India is a country least hospitable to such a decline”. Dr. Nanda ably demonstrated the real costs of India's failure to secularise: among them, the perpetuation of caste and gender inequities, the stunting of reason and critical facilities needed for economic and social progress; the corrosive growth of religious nationalism.
India cannot undo this harm until god and god's will are ejected from our public life. No sensible person would argue that the school curriculum ought to discourage eight-year-olds from discovering that the tooth fairy does not exist. No sensible person ought argue, similarly, that some purpose is served by buttressing the faith of adults in djinns, immaculate conceptions, or armies of monkeys engineering trans-oceanic bridges. It is legitimate for individuals to believe that cow-urine might cure their cancer — not for the state to subsidise this life-threatening fantasy.
In a 1927 essay, philosopher Bertrand Russell observed that theist arguments boiled down to a single, vain claim: “Look at me: I am such a splendid product that there must be design in the universe.”
The time has come for Indian secular-democrats to assert the case for a better universe: a universe built around citizenship and rights, not the pernicious identity politics the state and its holy allies encourage.
Keywords: Salman Rushdie, Jaipur Literature Festival, JLF
Related
NEWS
TOPICS
Comments:
Interesting editorial. Agree with most of the points but you are swimming against a powerful current. I left India more than 20 years ago and have been a frequent visitor. The power and finances of religious-political-
from: Kumar Srinivasan
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 01:47 IST
superb article!!from: sampath kumar
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 01:53 IST
Very well said! Too complicated for more God-loving closet-living people though.
from: xm
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 01:54 IST
I would be happy if the Author finds that, the so called Educated people are more into religious stuff than a day wage worker.When your stomach's full and you have huge amount of time to kill, this fanaticism arise! Though neither I endorse nor appose likes of Rushdie, I firmly believe that a line has to be drawn between critical analysis and mockery. When you deal with millions of people's belief you ought exercise restraint. As a Kid i too wondered about Djinn and tooth fairies, as I grew i understood those are mere stories but they are good memories to cherish all the life.In the name of science don't thrust upon kids your opinions. The Fact is, Religion and Caste are here to stay as long as you provide Reservations on the basis of Caste and now to Muslims, Dalit Christians etc etc. I personally feel, the author has stretched this Religion thing way too much.Well, these days Educated people believe more in Baba's than uneducated! Donno if Author is unaware of this fact.
from: Mandagaddi
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 01:56 IST
Excellent article. I never expected an article like this, mostly because it seems like such hopeless case in India. But it is timely nonetheless. It is time to reject the Nehruvian definition of secularism - equal treatment of all religions, and bring back the original definition - strict separation of church and state. It is time for our government to stop giving religions special favours.
from: S Divakaran
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 01:59 IST
Superb article. The kind that makes The Hindu a truly International paper. Thank you. I commend Sri Praveen Swami for having the courage to write this article and The Hindu for publishing it.from: John Smith
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 02:10 IST
Excellent article. There is not a country in this world which is secular. Even communist countries have to spend public money and spend on public policies on religious beliefs of the people. China "approves" the new Dalai Lama. Every country subsidizes donations to religious organizations through tax-free policies, which amounts to billions and billions of dollars a year. The support to manage Khumb Mela is based on religious siding or is it based on keeping Law and order? Having said all that, it is a shame that a Mr. Rushdie was kept out of a literary meeting due to a threat. What is the law in India against threatening someone?
from: Sam Zarinsky
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 02:20 IST
//India's clerics, regardless of their faith, have long been intensely hostile to state regulation of religion — witness the country's failure to rid itself of the faith-based laws that govern our personal lives. In the matter of the perpetuation of their religion, though, the state is a welcome ally.// Well said. The 'execution of Socrates' isn't a thing of past yet.from: GK
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 02:28 IST
The author has missed the state's acceptance of the theist's right to
use violence and in response the secularist's responsibility to adhere
to non violence. Instead of proactively using state machinery like the
police to protect free speech it is used to block it. And in light of
the recent Rushdie affair (again!) it is needless to say that
Rajasthan's CM - Ashok Gehlot is a coward.
use violence and in response the secularist's responsibility to adhere
to non violence. Instead of proactively using state machinery like the
police to protect free speech it is used to block it. And in light of
the recent Rushdie affair (again!) it is needless to say that
Rajasthan's CM - Ashok Gehlot is a coward.
from: Gaurav
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 02:28 IST
Praveen Swami, please check your facts and redefine the basis of your writings. If there is threat to national unity and the prospects of
violence, Govt has a right to restrict the person concerned. Rushdie
did not come on his own .. he had a valid Indian visa. Indian
government does support religious events but does not promote them as
many Christian and Muslim majority countries does. But that support is
often in logistic and infrastructure issues connected with the event
and not, for example, in the conduct of the actual event such as
paying the fees for the priest. It is good he did not come .. we do
not riots and bombs in India.
from: Sanjiv
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 02:54 IST
well written, it is sorry to see india moving in this direction killing
its constitutional promise of a secular nation.. A nation which instead
of owning its literary genius of a son.., instead abandoned him to the
persecution of "enemies of reason and freedom".
its constitutional promise of a secular nation.. A nation which instead
of owning its literary genius of a son.., instead abandoned him to the
persecution of "enemies of reason and freedom".
from: Vijay Challa
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 03:01 IST
Which country according to you is secular in that case, even USA or Great Britian has holidays during Christmas which is essentially a
christian festival so are they being biased in not giving holidays on
Muslim/Jew or Hindu festivals. Each country has its flavor lets enjoy
that flavor if we start going deep of anything we will find faults....
just one question... if someone writes something insulting and
derogatory about you.... will you not protest....you might question
the means of protest but not the basis of protest....
from: ankush
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 03:14 IST
I think this editorial written only for Salman. Because only he could understand this type of language. I did not understand anything from this article.
from: rajneesh
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 03:15 IST
At last, finally, I see a sensible article from Praveen Swami. from: adil
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 03:16 IST
A request to religious people wanting to ban people and books that don't agree with your views. 1) I respect your religious beliefs. 2) I will also fight to guarantee your fundamental right to worship whatever fits your beliefs. 3) I understand that you consider some text as sacred. But please remember that that is your belief and yours only. 4) I understand that you don't like people write things contrary to your beliefs and your "sacred texts". But please understand that as long as such writings are not preaching hatred or violence, that is a legitimate form of freedom of expression and everybody has that fundamental right in India. If you don't like you may ignore it, boycott it, and protest against it through peaceful democratic ways. But please understand that if you threaten such people with physical violence, let alone actually indulge in it or incite other people to do it, you are no more than a thug and society has a right to treat you as such.
from: Haridas Ramakrishnan
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 03:27 IST
Well said. As a once-Indian, I'm appalled. No, I'm incensed. (And I'm glad you've been fair in pointing the finger at the excesses in the mollycoddling of ALL religions. Otherwise, since the immediate incident is the Mullahs' demonism, the Rightists might feel vindicated about their Islam hate.) But this is a game of numbers. And the numbers are hugely against us "secular-democrats". At the risk of sounding elitist, the common man doesn't give a hoot about either free speech or about keeping religion out of state matters. And there are a billion "common men" vs. perhaps a million secular-democrats.The glass is not just half empty -- it is 99.9% empty.
from: Forrest
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 03:34 IST
Immature article. Author has mixed up religious observance & political sensitivity with orthodox religiosity & intolerance. Till the time Constitution prevails, no politics will ever be successful in undermining Secularism in long turn. Yes we have grave issues, but like untouchability, they will be overcome - we need sense of political and social maturity. Our General Class masses are educating now. So, wait. Let market economy, education, science and literature play its part (thats what happened in Europe during renaissance & Industrial Revolution). It took 350 yrs for Church to realise injustice it made with galileo galilei. May be it will take longer in India, but we need to keep working in that direction. Nevertheless, this article is crude attempt in that direction.
from: Mahesh J
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 03:55 IST
Congratulations to Praveen Swami for the excellent write up on religion sponspored by the government. It is unconstitutional and illegal to sponsor any religion or religious activity by the secular government. Where is our supreme court and high courts? The central and state governments have to stop the practice of promoting religion and religious activities. There are even designated departments and ministers in the government to promote religion in the name of providing conveniences to pilgrims; repairs and preservation of temples, mosques and gurudwaras; providing financial assitance to pilgrims to Mecca, Kailash, gurudwaras in Pakistan and other religious places; and spend billions of rupees by the government to encourage religions of choice of the government. The political parties tainted by religion make it hard to implement secularism in India. India is not a secular nation envisaged by our founding fathers. The secularism in India is dead. from: Davis K. Thanjan
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 04:00 IST
Kudos to a great piece of writing! Though India's constitution declares it as a Secular democracy and guides the lawmakers to develop and encourage scientific temperament of the citizens, politicians have always played to the religious galaries. Who can forget the arguments agains uniform civil code and a universal victimhood that is used as a ploy to prevent any meaningful changes to the laws to promote the same. Political party that want to implement Uniform Civil Code on one hand, tries to promote teaching of pseudo-sciences like Astrology and medical benefits of cow urine.
Any progressive, modern ideas and pratices that try to challenge these obscurantist attitudes are readily labled as "Corrupting Western Influences". The way things are, I do not see any hope even from current and next generations, because, even the most scientifically literate professionals, Doctors, engineers believe in superstitions and follow the various baba's blindly!
Any progressive, modern ideas and pratices that try to challenge these obscurantist attitudes are readily labled as "Corrupting Western Influences". The way things are, I do not see any hope even from current and next generations, because, even the most scientifically literate professionals, Doctors, engineers believe in superstitions and follow the various baba's blindly!
from: Rana
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 04:10 IST
Let all rational thinking people support our writers by buying their books and reading them in community groups, all over the country.
Also writers and civil society put up a fatwa on thease religious leaders.
from: utsav
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 05:03 IST
Why single out the Muslims ? What happened with M F Hussain ? Where was 'The Hindu' when Hindu nationalist goons hounded and chased this genius out of the country for work that was inspired by carvings on ancient Hindu Temples. Are you trying to say that we Hindus are more tolerant. What a joke !! At least they didn't resort to violence with impunity, which seems to be a privilege reserved only for the majority. Political correctness is rampant in this country due to our visceral inferiority complex. Lets not shamelessly point fingers here without introspection.
from: Ankit
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 05:04 IST
Your editorial is Gobbledygook on religion, secularism, Salman Rushdie and State funds to support religion. (1) Let us briefly talk about Salman issue. Surely it’s a pity some virulent elements aligned with intolerant mullahs made noise about his presence in India. But it’s him who chose not to visit the festival, and chose not to become a possible martyr to the lofty ideal of “literary freedom” as he may not be ready to give up easily the enjoyment of the good-life he has back in the US. (2) Religion is an issue as old as the civilized world itself. No religion is entirely capable of explaining the origin of the universe at large in one end, and certainly not capable explaining all the complexities of the earth at the other end. But so is atheist’s idea of the universe. Unfortunately the people aligned with religion will beat the atheists by 1 to 100,000 purely on number. In my opinion atheists are a lot of people who too much of a good life or too little angry people.from: Lakshminarasimahn A
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 05:04 IST
The western definition of secularism equates it with atheism, in contrast the Indian understanding of secularism belives in equality of religion. Therefore, if one observers the subsidies given to the Haj piligrimage or to the Sikh pilgrims or to Hindu devotees from this lens then the questions which needs to be asked is whether the state is equal towards all of them. Furthermore, one should also observe the Salman Rushdie debacle from this perspective where the Indian government should genuinely consider the appeals of the Muslims, and compare it to the Hindu Nationalists agitation towards the artists Hussian. Note: I am not trying to say that the state is right in not allowing Salman or right it being complicit with the Hindu Nationalists when Hussain was expelled but whether the state is equal towards all the religions, especially towards the minorities. Lastly, the author should nt be blindly accept the western understanding and should shed some light before labelling it a theocracy.
from: Dishil Shrimankar
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 05:14 IST
When I started reading the article, I thought, what a courageous step on the part of The Hindu. But as I read the article in its entirety it
became clear that the writer was taking a very cowardly stance that
falls short on facts in its attempt to even the communal scales by
apportioning equal blame. The author writes on Salman Rushdie's ban
vis a vis a particular religious group and the need for that group, in
this particular context, to open itself up to mature and democratic
debates not fatwas. Yet, he chooses to sharpen his secular knife on
the very community which has produced more dissenting voices within
itself than any other religious group in India, Hindus. Further, he
ignores critical facts in depicting the religiosity of the Indian
State - that not only does the state give money but receives more
money from large Hindu pilgrimages like Sabarimala and Tirupathi,
which it administratively controls. It does not administer places of
worship of any other community. Why?
from: Malavikag
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 05:30 IST
Nice article that touches on the "official" pseudo-secular practices of the Central and State Governments in India. Most of the media refuses to touch on this aspect and that should also be actively opposed by all concerned.
from: F. Minu
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 06:19 IST
Rational people will share Mr Swami's enthusiasm for pushing religion out of public sphere and making it a matter of a person's private
life.World will be a better place without organized religion, but what
about other maladies that afflict us, like nationalism, racism etc?
Just focusing on one of our many problems is missing the point...May be
they are all related and boils down to some basic problem in human mind!
from: Sunil
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 06:28 IST
Editor's concern for a nation truly called Secular democratic India and a much more secular world is valid. But it may take million more years to establish such a noble concept in democracy which has several inherent variables.
from: Vyas K Susarla
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 06:48 IST
Right or freedom of expression could not be bigger than humanity. There is so much hue and cry about opposition of Rashdi by so called liberals but they dont understand the values of a religion followed by about one third of global population. West is using the tool of freedom of expression ,generaaly to support islamophobia and indian media is following them blindly.Secularism doesnt mean hurting any religious or faith or in any way showing disrespect to any faith ,secularism means respecting evey faith and hence if Salman rashdi is not coming to india ,its helpfull for India's secularism .from: Atiullah
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 06:51 IST
When, with sufficient distance in time, the history of independent India is written, the attempt by Nehru to take it by the scruff, screaming and yelling, into the modern world, and its return in a mere 50 years back to its old ways, will find prime place of mention. Substitute "another" as Prime Minister the first fifteen years, and imagine for yourself what India would already look like today. One shudders at what it might have become by now, so its not too difficult to accept that it will get increasingly shrill and strident, with trouble coming, more frequently, and for more felt slights, with the state nowhere to be seen to defend anything or anyone.
India imported secular democracy and gingerly placed it upon a feudal, caste and religion centric, poor, superstitious, mostly illiterate society, so why be surprised its not visible anywhere, really, except momentarily every quinquennial, only to vanish immediately thereafter? Real democracy is two generations away, still - 2070.
India imported secular democracy and gingerly placed it upon a feudal, caste and religion centric, poor, superstitious, mostly illiterate society, so why be surprised its not visible anywhere, really, except momentarily every quinquennial, only to vanish immediately thereafter? Real democracy is two generations away, still - 2070.
from: K Kitchlu
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 07:00 IST
>With at most respect and belief in the constitution , I ask would if your , mine & many other like minded peoples ideology supersede the
constitution which has a provision of banning a particular book if it
uses profanity against any religion,prophet,etc? If we as liberal secularists say "lets exercise freedom of speech in absolute terms" , wouldnt the right wing radicals create a ruckus ?
At the same time , not allowing Rushdie in India as well violates the
constitution and this is where the state government has failed us and
the constitution !
from: Azhar
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 07:04 IST
An excellent write up. The complicated relationship ordinary hindus hold with the supernatural can't be undone by provoking rational arguments. Myth is history in India. Bertrand Russell also said, most people prefer to die than to think and most do! In a country where most hindus think that muslims brought upon themselves the madness of Godhra need time to reflect, which is an exercise requiring time. India seems to be in a hurry and wouldn't pause for its own good.
from: Reju Nair
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 07:07 IST
Dear Mr.Swami, Your basic premise sounds very good and I really hope this becomes a reality. But, your examples are really suspect. That the government provides for public health during Kumbh Mela or security enroute Amarnath is its basic duty just as it would during a cricket match. As to how you would classify this as state sponsoring religion is beyond me. from: Kiran
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 07:44 IST
If this is really about literary freedom, then, why did the organizers not invite Mr. Joseph Lelyveld, Pulitzer prize winner author of the banned book “The Great Soul” portraying Gandhiji’s sexual life. Why also did they not invite Paul Courtright, Professor of Emory University, Atlanta who authored the book titled “Ganesa: Lord of Obstacles, Lord of Beginnings“ which is also banned in India. This book was published by Oxford University Press in 1985. Its later 2001 edition had a front cover depicting Ganesa, naked. There are plenty of insidious passages in this book tarnishing the image of Shiva and Parvati as well. There was a storm of protest in 2001 and petitions were signed by then Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee, MPs and Shiv Sena demanding that the book be immediately withdrawn from circulation and the author must be asked to tender an unconditional apology. This is a classic example of hypocrisy of hindus to crticize muslims when they have done exactly the same in the past.
from: Max
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 07:56 IST
Brilliant article, this. Trenchant analysis of the situation. Kudos.from: Mike
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 08:26 IST
One of the best articles ever written on so called "Secularism in India" - that should in theory promote harmony amongst people of different beliefs (be it religious or non-religious) but in practice, promotes clear divisions amongst the people based on one's beliefs because for some bizarre reason, the state wants to allow each one of its citizens to impose their own unreasonable stance on the society as this stance either follows or contradicts their beliefs. Similar to Isaac Asimov's Robotic laws, we should have laws on how each citizen follows his / her own belief in Secular society. 1. A citizen's belief may not cause distress to another citizen or, through imposition, allow another citizen to come to distress. 2. A citizen must respect the beliefs of other citizens, except where such respect would conflict with the First Law. 3. A citizen must be able to protect his / her own belief as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws.
from: Sriram Pyngas
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 08:32 IST
Good column, but author should have mentioned Jawaharla Nehru introducing the Haj Bill in 1958 and Rajiv Gandhi's Shilanyas at Ayodhya to compensate for the Shah Bano surrender. What India has is not secularism but competitive communalism. Incidentally, the West is also buckling under threats. Shariat courts are common in U.K. and U.S. academia has silenced and/or dismissed sevearal faculty members, not just Subramanian Swamy, for their views about Islam and even terrorism. Incidentally Meera Nanda is critical of Hindu excesses but silent when it comes to Jihadi terror.It seems the whole world is succumbing to religious terror.from: N.S. Rajaram
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 08:46 IST
While I agree that censoring Salman Rushdie is a disturbing event for the democratic ambitions of India, I am not convinced with various other opinions put forward by the author. Firstly, the author is talking as if the secular democracy is empirically proven to be the optimal political configuration for any country. Democracy is so good to talk about, but practically it is impossible in such way that the talk is realized. Secondly, India is way more secular than any other
country in the world as of now. For example, take the case of Western democracies and the amount of money (In billion $) they spend on promoting Christianity for example. If 83% of Indians are Hindus, and if they want to celebrate Kumbh mela, then it is of couse Govt's responsibility to provide amenities for the attendees. After all, democracy is for the people who are ruled and these events do not involve any kind of violence or spreading of hatred or anything of that sort.
country in the world as of now. For example, take the case of Western democracies and the amount of money (In billion $) they spend on promoting Christianity for example. If 83% of Indians are Hindus, and if they want to celebrate Kumbh mela, then it is of couse Govt's responsibility to provide amenities for the attendees. After all, democracy is for the people who are ruled and these events do not involve any kind of violence or spreading of hatred or anything of that sort.
from: Chenna
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 09:09 IST
While I agree that censoring Salman Rushdie is a disturbing event for the democratic ambitions of India, I am not convinced with various other opinions put forward by the author. Firstly, the author is talking as if the secular democracy is empirically proven to be the optimal political configuration for any country. Democracy is so good to talk about, but practically it is impossible execute in such way that the talk is realized. Secondly, India is way more secular than any other country in the world as of now. For example, take the case of Western democracies and the amount of money (In billion $) they spend on promoting Christianity for example. If 83% of Indians are Hindus, and if they want to celebrate Kumbh mela, then it is of couse Govt's responsibility to provide amenities for the attendees. After all, democracy is for the people who are ruled and these events do not involve any kind of violence or spreading of hatred or anything of that sort.
from: Chenna
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 09:09 IST
Brilliant article! You have said what a lot of us have believed in
private but had neither the guts nor the platform to express. Religion
is a slow working poison, and if you do not stem it's spread into the
governance of the country it will destroy all that is good about the
idea of India. It is shocking that people who fought against an abstract
idea of corruption will not stand up for an injustice that will only
harm them in the long run!
private but had neither the guts nor the platform to express. Religion
is a slow working poison, and if you do not stem it's spread into the
governance of the country it will destroy all that is good about the
idea of India. It is shocking that people who fought against an abstract
idea of corruption will not stand up for an injustice that will only
harm them in the long run!
from: Rahul Dsouza
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 09:17 IST
Rushdie has a point. Over the years I have seen makeshift shrines coming up overnight on public land. The state turns a blind eye to such encroachment. In a few months or years they gradually add on to them until they become permanent ugly structures of stone and concrete. By that time, it is too late for the government to act to recover the land. While these concrete monstrosities are cropping up everywhere the really old authentic temples from the past suffer from neglect. from: S S Kere
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 09:59 IST
Govt. of India and State Govts should indeed stop spending on events like Kumbh mela. They should also remove their paws from the coffers at Tirupati, Guruvayoor and allow these institutions to bear the expenses.
from: John Krishnan
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 10:04 IST
"Religion is opium of masses" - Lenin. Indian Authorities understand this statement more than any other governments in world. Indian
Government wants their masses to forget/not to think of their pains.
from: Santhanam
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 10:29 IST
Great article. History tells us that there are two ways to get religion out of public sphere- 1) Thomas Jefferson way and 2)Complete rejection of religion as a way to build a society by the society, like in most northern European countries. Sadly both these options are misplaced in time for India. We needed a secular visionary like Thomas Jefferson in 1949, and it will take years before we can democratically reject religion in India. But the least we can do is raise awareness about this issue which is cording our country from within. Its such an irony that just by adding a prefix like swamy, baba, rishi, guru, pandit, maulvi, sister, it qualifies one to commit the most horrific crimes and yet demand respect. We have to stand united against this encroachment of our freedom of religion and freedom from religion.
from: Kruttik Aggarwal
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 10:34 IST
Praveen Swami deserves to be congratulated for such a well thought out and fearless editorial. Indeed, secularism logically implies ouster of god and religion from public life to be really meaningful. Let those who worship irrationality confine their cults to their private domain without harming anybody. I have read the banned Satanic verses and find nothing in it worth expunging. from: Rajesh Asudani
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 10:36 IST
The problem with secularism in India is that it is considered as accommodation of all religions within the state's ambit rather than the absence of all religion in official polity. Looking at the state of things in India we have a long way to reach there. Why not start by dismantling all those images of Gods (mostly Hindu) from public offices and spheres? A good dose of agnostic thinking is the need of the hour, unfortunately even the avowed atheists of Tamilnadu have become pious believers.
God save this land.
God save this land.
from: Arvind
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 10:53 IST
It is clear from this write up that India has not unshackled itself from theocracy in one form or the other. One of the worst forms of
governance are those that belong to the theocratic line. Secularism
really does not exist in this country with political parties taking
sides with either the majority religion or the minority religions, as
their opportunistic needs warrant. If you switch on the radio, you are
bound to hear bhajans etc on the All India Radio stations. The caste
system still perpetuates in fact every political party subscribes to
caste policies. We can see politicians of all hues and cries
thronging to temples and different mutts, seeking blessings from
"mutt" chiefs. Their confidence in astrology is astronomical. The sane people of India should encourage people to keep religion within the
four walls of their house and never let it spill out. The state should
keep away from anything and everything related to religion - minority
or majority.
from: Andrew Knotts
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 10:59 IST
Well, I do agree with most of the contents of this article. But I have reservations about some points. 1. The writer blames delhi govt for issuing grants for repair and maintenance of ancient temples. I would ask, is it really a blunder? It is the duty of govt to protect and preserve our national heritages. Swamyji will you object to the decision of govt to spend on Jami Masjid on repair and maintenance, if it suffers from infrastructural damages in future? 2. The Indian politics is focussed on real world issues - are you serious or is it a joke? How will you categorize the recent statement of Khurshid in UP campaigns on increase in Muslim reservation in state govt jobs. You mean to say, this is a real world issue having nothing to do with religion based votebank politics?
from: Chetan
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 11:01 IST
Great people whether they are writers,painters,thinkers etc could produce and give great things acceptable to all the human beings.They have that talents at all periods of times.Some of them want to become famous like the politicians and they do indulge in certain area just to get popularity.Freedom of speech should not be over enjoyed just to get this popularity.from: T.S.Gopalakrishnan
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 11:04 IST
Though the proud Indian that I am, considers Mr.Praveen Swami's words harsh, I would never consider it as even slightly inapprotriate. Constructive criticism, indeed. A retrospection is needed into the functioning of our democracy since independance vis-a-vis secularism. Much more needs to be done to make sure that a democratic system is not aligned to be under pressure to undermine its secular ambitions.
from: antony paul
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 11:07 IST
A truly bizarre piece trying to lump state spending on the Kumbh arrangements,Haj subsidies , Eisebius's winning by state support and Manichaeism being wiped out by sate oppression.Faith is and will always be part of human existence.What happened to the Soviet state the most recent Atheistic experiment the world has seen.The church seems to be on rebound in that erstwhile communist state and the state rakes with corruption..Such sweeping generalities against all forms of theism have been part and parcel of the secularists Armour.These are just words and nothing more. The fact behind the subject matter is that Salman Rushdies long forgotten 'Satanic verses'cawas resurrected by the Darul-Uloom seminary on the UP election eve (by unknown powers ). In electoral politics where numbers and brute majority matter and nothing else such episodes are bound to happen. Democracy is and will always be a number game only. Ruling dispensations will do all in its power to retain power in this game.from: S.Madhavan
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 11:32 IST
Thank you so much for writing a beautiful, purposeful and indeed alarming article. Thank you The Hindu for publishing it.
from: Prabht Pal
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 11:48 IST
It's not the case whether you are theists or not.If our state ban the events like "kumbh mela",everyone knows what will happen after that.If our state allows that and don't spend money in infrastructure building,administration and facilities in organising such events then it will lead to disaster like sabarimala stampede.Everyone have their own faith and we can progress and develop social values without leaving such beliefs.I think the views of the author is biased.from: Vineet
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 11:58 IST
The ban on Salman Rushdie travel to India, the hounding out of M.F.Husain from place of his birth, the recent attack on Delhi University 'painting exhibition', the ban on Ramanujam essay in Delhi University, all have a pattern of imminent slow motion disintegration of India's much celebrated secularism, as author has rightly underscored.
from: sarbas kumar
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 12:00 IST
It is a fact that there is increasing narrow mindedness and bigotry in society today. The hardliners are calling the shots all over the world!The liberals are under attack as never before.The politicians-financiers-from: umesh bhagwat
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 12:03 IST
Wonderful article. I've been waiting to see an article like this in the Indian media for a long long time. If we are to move towards an more enlightened, humanistic society in which individual rights and our shared humanity, rather than sectarian and divisive religions affiliations, are the basis for our nationhood, then the media should play the lead role. Kudos to the author for exposing how much the government is pandering to the whims of the religious, with the effect that the religious extremists are having an increasingly loud voice in
our societies. As an atheist, I see that the only way to counter this is to encourage all atheists to come out of the closet and announce themselves. Only if the politicians know that atheists and agnostics too comprise a formidable voting bloc will the take our voice seriously. We need the equivalent of a Richard Dawkins in India.
our societies. As an atheist, I see that the only way to counter this is to encourage all atheists to come out of the closet and announce themselves. Only if the politicians know that atheists and agnostics too comprise a formidable voting bloc will the take our voice seriously. We need the equivalent of a Richard Dawkins in India.
from: Raamganesh
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 12:04 IST
Excellent and timely article. However, a large part of the blame must be squared laid on the media both print and electronic. Look back two or three decades back, no mainstream newspaper or magazine carried regular columns on religion or religious matters. Also, there were virtually no columns on Alternate medicines, miracles, astrology, vastu and the like. But today these are bandied about as established science. The electronic media is still worse. The rationalists, secularists and anti-theists are completely sidelined here. That is why future of Indian secularism looks pretty dismal indeed. from: Rama Rao K
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 12:07 IST
In our country where Mythology and history are often counterposed and the baggage that we collected from central Asian settlers and invaders and indegenous clans, is cleverly marketed as Heritage, it is difficult even for the youngest most modern generation to think secular. When we try to interpret history in terms of religious identities, that appeal only to emotion and ritualistic faith,there an be brakes applied to sincere intellectual self evaluation.Puranic religions went on assimilating new deities,and rituals and incorporating marginal societies and their baggage for long times and today this has created an ideal atmosphere for all sorts of Godmen to live in regal splendour. Removing religious intolerance and replacing it with a secular mindset should be the top priority for those who guide our young minds.We have to decide urgently, today, as to what kind of an India we want for us and our children.Obviously , religions as we practiced did not make us nicer to each other!
from: Jayanthram
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 12:13 IST
@haridas Ramkrishan and all those who favour rushdie: i think it the other way, though we have our freedom to express our thoughts,but to target some special personalities , that may harm the feelings of many of your citizens is not a good thinking. You have full authority to ask about there actions that effects others,to express our thoughts about there views but you cant disrespect or say unaceptable words against those personalities which they consider sacred.As that person did. Secular means to run a govt without religious interference but protecting the religious beliefs of people in such a way that calm harmony exists between us,,i.e what India is..a land of religious faith living with harmony to form a dynamic secular state..
from: Rahul Kumar Jat
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 12:29 IST
The article pretty much has all the reasons why I still subscribe to The
Hindu. Secularism does not mean equal appeasement of all religions. It
mean complete irreverence to any religion.
Hindu. Secularism does not mean equal appeasement of all religions. It
mean complete irreverence to any religion.
from: Bala Nirmukta
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 12:34 IST
All religions have deep roots in India. we have to treat every one equally, respect their values , traditions/festivals and beliefs..
Govt should be neutral in providing services or at least support to the
people. India is subcontinent with various cultures and people to maintain unity among these people govt should support them ..otherwise we will
disintegrate/perish into small countries like Pak, Bangladesh.. etc
from: ravikumar
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 12:35 IST
Yes. Religion is a private affair and state has to focus on the
governance without any religious bias. However, the author should
refrain from teaching the parents on how to bring their children.
According to me science is also a myth. In science every discovery is
based on what we can see with our limited vision, understanding . The
more you explore the more you correct your understanding about the
universe. Today's capitalism and technology leaves people live in
comfort just like machines but I am sure there is no single person in
the earth who says I am happy always. But a citizen who go through
the religious teaching without any prejudice can attain far better
happiness than in the modern world. People are rushing and fighting
for IPAD2 than worrying about global warming which destroy the very
existence of our mother earth. Let us stop looking the natural
resources with the prisom of SCIENCE and also start finding answers
from ANCIENT WISDOM
governance without any religious bias. However, the author should
refrain from teaching the parents on how to bring their children.
According to me science is also a myth. In science every discovery is
based on what we can see with our limited vision, understanding . The
more you explore the more you correct your understanding about the
universe. Today's capitalism and technology leaves people live in
comfort just like machines but I am sure there is no single person in
the earth who says I am happy always. But a citizen who go through
the religious teaching without any prejudice can attain far better
happiness than in the modern world. People are rushing and fighting
for IPAD2 than worrying about global warming which destroy the very
existence of our mother earth. Let us stop looking the natural
resources with the prisom of SCIENCE and also start finding answers
from ANCIENT WISDOM
from: Manikandan
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 12:41 IST
Freedom to practice religion also includes the freedom from religion. Another commenter has it right. Most people, including our government, seems to think that a secular state must treat all religions as equally valid and in need of support. But there are many who say that this position excludes atheists and agnostics who think all religion is equally false. I believe, as an atheist, that religion should be treated as a personal matter and that the state should get out of it entirely. When the state gets into the business of religion, see the kind of skewed priorities pointed out in the article, such as spending billions on favoured groups of religious people over the needs of malnourished children of the country.from: Raamganesh
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 12:47 IST
Excellent! State bereft of right policy apart, ask our super rich to donate to a good secular cause and see how quickly you get a 'no' or put on hold; ask for a religious cause (for that expensive diamond to stud a deity's crown) and a cheque gets signed or you may be 'requested' to accept cash.
from: n. satya murti
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 12:47 IST
An erudite article but needs a caveat. I have personal knowledge of this story about Indira Gandhi as PM. At Nasik while returning from Nasik Kumbha mela she was asked why she, an agnostic, accepted holy water at the river In reply , she merely said - How can I be PM of a country if what I do not feel joy in what millions of my countrymen enjoy and believe . There is an inherent arrogance in current fashionable mind set change argument by the secularists ( each of whom secretly practices some form of extra rational belief ). Shows people change and smile but the agony abides. Remember that the 18 c enlightenment is only the latest and there were prior ones by which a large part of humanity still continues to live and cope from: RSrinivaan
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 13:34 IST
We appear to have become a brutish nation - one that does not brook any criticism - and one that is increasingly intolerant.
from: anitha pottamkulam
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 13:43 IST
One of the best-written articles on this extremely important and worrisome issue. Jotted down all the points beautifully without any biases or prejudices. It couldn't get better than this.Congrats on a great piece!from: Indu Nair
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 14:11 IST
An absurd essay on the secularism When lakhs of people thronged for a religious festival it is the duty of the Government to provide safety, drinking water etc. When the Govt. can speend crores of Rupees on security of VIPs every year what is harm in spending money once in 12 years.
from: raam
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 15:03 IST
Such a reflexive piece on Indian secularism! Those who were up-in- arms against Praveen Swamy some time ago accusing him of a Hindu fundamentalist should take some time and read the present article and understand that he is a man who is concerned more about Indian secular ethos rather about a particular religion or its principles. After reading Swamy's article, one prominent sociologist who comes to my immediate memory is Prof. Rowena Robinson, now Professor at IIIT Mumbai, who has long been arguing against the arbitrary support by the Indian state to one religion over the other. Its time our government woke up to the real danger of growing religiosity in the day-today governance of country and take necessary steps to restore the constitutional propriety accorded to secularism in independent India.from: N. Annavaram
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 15:06 IST
Science has demolished all religious dogmas. Long after Nietzsche, God is indeed dead! But the reality is that vast majority of humanity still seeks the comfort of the ghosts of the past. No State can be more progressive than its people. Unfortunately, social harmony takes precedence over atheist's freedom!
"Politics is the art the possible" and in semi-feudal India only the hybrid product of Gandhi's ecumenicalism and Nehru's atheism is possible. India (and U.S., the first to adopt it) may not be perfect, but there are no better examples.
Much of Europe, in practice, is secular, though some like England have a State Religion in theory. The former Soviet republics have relapsed into not only religion and divisive sectarianism. In most Islamic countries (with the exception of Turkey) religion and sectarianism are supreme. In South America, even radical Marxists co-opt the Catholic Church! The only proven antidote to religion is material prosperity, industrialization and urbanization.
"Politics is the art the possible" and in semi-feudal India only the hybrid product of Gandhi's ecumenicalism and Nehru's atheism is possible. India (and U.S., the first to adopt it) may not be perfect, but there are no better examples.
Much of Europe, in practice, is secular, though some like England have a State Religion in theory. The former Soviet republics have relapsed into not only religion and divisive sectarianism. In most Islamic countries (with the exception of Turkey) religion and sectarianism are supreme. In South America, even radical Marxists co-opt the Catholic Church! The only proven antidote to religion is material prosperity, industrialization and urbanization.
from: Thiru. V. Ramakrishnan
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 15:06 IST
The slow motion collapse of secularism starts from Rajiv Gandhi govt of 1984.While RG may have many things to his credit like leading India in the path of technology revolution and Panchayati Raj he is the culprit of tearing the fabric of secular modern India conceptualised by Nehru. Occasional vices were done by the govts before but his appeasement policy towards both Hindu and Muslim religions was well outside the expanded Indian meaning of secularism which called for tolerance of religion but keep it outside of the functioning of the State.He unlocked the gates of Ayodhya, he led the legislation in Shah Bano case, his govt banned Satanic Verses and his govt pandered to the conservative Hindu by purveying serials through Doordarshan; infact he has done all he could do to make India a federation of religions and for the future govts to emulate and continue.His lack of vision in politics has not received the sufficient rebuke it deserves.from: Arun
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 15:19 IST
Our political leaders are truly secular! The Congress government had originally banned Satanic Verses, two decades ago, and yet another Congress government discouraged Rushdie from coming to Jaipur this year. In between, the BJP led NDA turned a blind eye to attacks on MF Hussain. And the CPM in Bengal prevented Taslima Nasrin from staying in West Bengal, and now the Mamata Banerjee, the most anti-CPM party in India, is in power, and has chosen to follow the steps of CPM, and not allowed Ms Nasrin back. With leaders like these, who needs religion?
from: barun
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 15:26 IST
The broad point of this article is that the post-Nehru Indian state's Janus headed policy on religion is leading to the contradictions becoming the core and not merely perforating it. Much as I admire Praveen Swami's style of writing, I regret that often form gets the upper hand of content. Taking John Dayal's figures on state support to Kumbh Mela, Ganga Sagar mela, etc. in exclusivity of the larger context betrays a complex mix of passions affecting the writer's judgment. If all those taps and electric lines were not laid out by the state, there could have been mass outbreaks of jaundice, more stampedes, and who knows how many rapes and child lifting. This system of "covering" mass assemblages began as early as 1834 when the Bengal government began providing police security to the Chhat festival. Gradually other presidency administrations realized that prevention is better than cure. One more thing - the charge that Astrology was introduced in school curricula is downright falsehood.from: udayan
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 15:29 IST
Finally someone dares to channel the slow but creeping disapperance of socalled Indian Secularism - tolerance! Methinks pace of developments will eventually inform the public what danger they're perpetuating with by saubsidizing religious groups - who have no other mission but to curtail Indian secularism. Nehru's injunction at midnight when tryst with destiny made the subcontinent independent - of British Raj - clearly signalling the rule of secular ideology of the new Indian State. Yet developments are endering the secular state less defensible!
from: dr. hari naidu
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 15:43 IST
It's unfortunate that a lit fest was overtaken by a non issue of Salman Rushdie coming down to India. I fail to understand the psychology of the
people opposing Salman to come to India when he has landed in India
umpteen number of times over the past few years. Why has it become a
problem now? Unfortunately, the issue was hijacked by politicians in
order to score brownie points ahead of the election! Unfortunate,
totally!!!
from: Naveed Hussain Badroo
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 15:45 IST
You started with a valid point that the state orchestrated the intelligence reports of a possible assassination attempt on Rushdie to make sure he is absent from Jaipur lit fest but then you got in to uncharted territory and 'you lost it'. The original definition of secularism is not meant for India and Nehru did well to accept a more practical and feasible version of secularism for India and it has till now worked with minor glitches(unavoidable) but only in the past 2 decades that religious fundamentalists of all kinds has started dictating terms to the state owing to vote bank politics and moreover due lack of representation of all communities in the National parties that regional parties have grown like weeds everywhere and fueled these communal sentiments.About the state subsidizing religious rituals like Kumbh, Haj etc. it's not a choice it's a compulsion for the state otherwise thousands will die at every kumbh. Religion is in the DNA of India you can't take it out.
from: Rahul Sharma
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 16:12 IST
A well written criticism . Kudos to 'The Hindu' for bringing out such an informative article . The citizens themselves need to be more wary of the colours that the political party takes because the political party brings to the forefront what is there in the minds of the people. Hence the citizens must be educated about the nitty gritty of this democracy which this article is successful. from: P Mitra
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 16:13 IST
Mr.Praveen please do not hurt the sentiments of around 1 billion people there are thousands of Good facts that one can en-grain from Any religion may t be.....secularism does not means internal disturbances to national peace...It's not wise to tell India's whole religion and all are dustbin its just misunderstood by you and some antisocial elements and thus innocent people are be fooled in its name....So problem is in Interpretation not in faith.....If you don't believe it ok why hurt someone....Every educated person knows religion is misused by politicians these days....that does not mean eradicate religion......
from: James
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 16:17 IST
I agree, I liked the conclusion :) Religion, belief, delusion is a personal affair and state should concentrate on running the country, this should be very clear. To achieve a uniform platform for humans irrespective of race,religion,caste,creed or sex to pursue happiness. I also feel the need for a clear cut definition of freedom of action in India. I will not compare India to any other country in the world and how things work in spite of a state religion, I would only say that India is unique in its diversity and it demands a unique long term solution. Salman Rushdie or MF Hussain or Taslima or any other writer - artist or common man should be treated equal, should have the right to exercise his or her freedom of action. People who do not agree with them must ignore them, but not threaten them. Human life, safety, happiness and freedom is above God,religion or sentiments. This applies to one and all. I still hope to see a better India, a place I could be happy to be born in. from: Guruprasad
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 16:51 IST
Swami the pundit, should have his moment, to share his opinion. He has expressed well. May he now find passage back to Utopia or where ever one belongs. Swami is right that society, especially educated, intellectuals should have unrestricted access to diverse opinion and decide for themselves whom to applaud and who to deride, over tea and biscuits. IMO, trashing Government policies using hoarse, high pitched arguments only robs the focus away from the Government succumbing to narrow religious interests that prevented Mr.Rushdie from travelling to Jaipur.
from: sridhar
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 17:07 IST
Wonderful article from Mr Praveen Swamy. He has meticulously exposed the chimerical nature of Indian secularism. Truly secular persons find it difficult to live in india because their freedom of expression is subject to censorship by all religions.from: karan
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 17:16 IST
india has diverse people in every term including cultural beliefs hence india has to be a secular country. Our constitution has clearly mentioned in fundamental rights part III that every person is allowed to perform their religious duties and if they donot want to attend or perform any religious ceremony it is its right to freedom however, union government will not allow any favour to any particular religion. When it is mentioned to spend millions of ruppees on Kumbha mela or any other religious state and promote tourism and livelihood of every people in the area and generate employment as well. with the freedom of speech it comes a responsibility, our duties, part V in the constitution. The writer is suggested to understand the basics of economy, constitution, history and general information about our country before giving his expression.
from: reetu sharma
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 17:17 IST
From the time of ancient Kings throughout the world there has been state patronage of religion. Hindu mythology is replete with instances of Kings bowing before and listening to the dicatates of Rishis. This then has been a way of governance since time immemorial and we in India are no exception. How many of our elected representatives are elected solely on the basis of their merits? Does not their religion or caste play a part? For the State to totally distance itself from religion, especially in a country with such a rich tradition of religion and spirituality is a vain argument. The question is how does it go about in this without impacting citizenship rights? I have no straight answers and nor does the author seem to provide them.from: varadarajan raman
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 17:20 IST
Very well said. It will be very unfortunate if religion once again becomes a dominant rhetoric in Indian politics. As many commentators pointed out, the political spending on religious activities and groups has increased dramatically since the late 90s. The fundamentalists always hijack a non-issue when political factions don't have a firm secular policy. Even in developed countries like America, religion is extremely powerful and religious groups exert tremendous pressure on policy makers. But, the people of India shouldn't forget that India is founded upon a secular ideology and they shall have no right to censor the religious views of other people, no matter how much they disagree with you.
from: Satya G Meka
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 17:20 IST
All the money from from almost all the Hindu temple are in Government hands. It is government's duty to spend for Hindu cultural activities. But the money collected by Churches and mosques are controlled by themselves and government has no duty of spending on their behalf. The author should not compare Maha Kumbh Mela with other religions.from: Vijay Vel
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 17:28 IST
An excellent and sensible article on the most important issue in the Indian context by one of the finest columnist from a decent national newspaper. Religion is so intact with all the activity from dawn to dusk for a mojority in India. As the character of our nation is secular we must try to uphold it in the true spirit.But the problem lies in the correct definition of secularism in our nation. From the many interpratation i wish neutrality of state in religion will give a better result. Once again a fine article so load of thanks to Mr Swami.
from: Nurul Arfin
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 17:28 IST
The writer's basic idea of slamming the authorities for failure to ensure artistic freedom is well taken. But one wonders if Swami is not barking up the wrong tree in the rest of the piece. Every government the world over finances religious events, either directly or indirectly. Most such events like Kumbh Mela, Haj etc are a social, cultural tradition. The rituals connected with them really help the economy as thousands of people, mostly poor, receive financial benefits through their various services. Is it SwamI's argument that government do nothing when millions gather for a kumbh or similar other occasions? Temples, mosques, churches and other places of worship also represent treasure of art and architecture. Spending on their renovation and preservation is not an exclusive religious activity. The state has a duty here. I hope it is not the writer's argument that government ban all festivals that are here for millennia in order to uphold 'secularism'. One is all for improvements, better security and better sanitation during such massive religious and cultural events. It is futile to argue against state spending on these events as the state also receives financial returns. The world will be a barren, lifeless desert without religious/cultural festivals. I am sure Swami will not be able to suffer a single day in such a scenario.from: RC Rajmani
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 17:40 IST
This is a valiant attempt by Mr.Praveen Swamy! The political parties and the religious leaders have long forgotten to stand up for the oneness of humanity irrespective of caste and creed. There is so much of coercion regarding religion today, either crudely or subtly. Seeing the enlightened comments in this section gives hope for the future. The seeds of secularism and tolerance have to be freshly sowed again and India of our dreams must be built at all costs.
from: Yashwanth P
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 17:47 IST
I am surprised to see an article like this in The Hindu. But then if an article like this has to be printed in India then the hindus got to be it. Educated people in India have blind faith but to a lot lesser extent that the uneducated mass. US though developed is kind of an exception when it comes to irrationality. Over there Jesus in Bush's dreams and made him kill Iraqis. Excluding USA every other developed country advocates free speech and doesn't oppose religion bashing. How I dream to see an India like that... Here anything said about a leader, god, ritual, actor, actress, anything ... invites riots and protests. Rushdie is one of the few good writers to come out of India. from: Nitin Nair
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 18:07 IST
Excellent Article..India is truly a 'banana republic' where caste,creed and religion are the tri axis of evil which will make it implode incrementally. When the state subsidizes religion, it's a joke..Tax payer monies instead of being spent on roads,schools and infrastructure is being equally distributed to different sects and religious groups for their pilgrimage tours.. There is no incentive for politicians in the country to move away from this status quo since it makes their survival easy...
from: Ramesh
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 18:12 IST
@Rahul Kumar Jat - "Secular means to run a govt without religious interference but protecting the religious beliefs of people in such a way that calm harmony exists between us". But protection from what? You're right that a secular government must protect people's rights to hold their beliefs and to talk about them freely. No one should be forced to change their ideas or prevented from sharing them with others, write about it etc. But nobody has a right to claim protection for their ideas from CRITICISM of those ideas. You have a right to your ideas. I have a right to criticize them and call them ridiculous and silly, if I indeed feel that they are ridiculous and silly. We tolerate a level of criticism of ideas in all spheres of life - politics, economics, cricket, science etc, but when it comes to the ultimate truth of the nature of the cosmos...No you cannot criticize that because somehow that is SACRED, and is therefore considered immune from criticism and good-natured ridicule.from: Raamganesh
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 18:14 IST
Kudos to the author for touching on a current issue and delving deeper into the issue of putting religious fervor ahead of national well being. It is time for us to realize that most of us have to attribute the religious views we hold to something as fundamental as inheritance because, usually we belong to the religion that our parents belong to. It is not a choice most of us make exercising free will. We don't sit and read about different religions, analyze them and then decide what to go for. We instead look at the picture having already made a decision. It is a shame then and we then harbor this personal choice, which is not really a choice, and put this even ahead of our economic development.
from: Manoj Yasaswy
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 18:41 IST
Excellent article! Keep up bold work Hindu!from: Pankaj
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 18:45 IST
To all those opposing Rushdie's mere visit to India on the pretext that he criticized something sacred, I remember a quote from Hitchens "Is nothing sacred?" No, nothing is sacred. And even if there were to be something called sacred, we mere primates wouldn’t be able to decide which book or which idol or which city was the truly holy one. Thus, the only thing that should be upheld at all costs and without qualification is the right of free expression, because if that goes, then so do all other claims of right as well. - Christopher Hitchens
from: Aditya Sehgal
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 19:05 IST
A detailed and informative article with an undercurrent of frustration of any sensible person.Its high time we disillusion ourselves: secularism in India is confined to the constitution.This isn't a hypothesis,rather a fact and no complicated econometrics is required to verify this.Just take a look at the shocking numbers of communal riots & violence,and even staggering number of lives lost in them,count the sporadic clashes that lasts a day or two(the one in Rajasthan last year),innumerable fatwas, self-inflicted sentimental hurt,inexplicably forced exile and the list ironically goes on... does anything ever change? yes,it does;the so-called religion of perpetrators,geographical locations of massacre delhi,bhagalpur, ahmedabad, kandhamal...),the scale of violence and the nature of state patronge or lack thereof.every once in a while a M.F Hussain will be cremated abroad,a Rushdie will cancel a literary
festival and millions will suffer the ignominy of muted cowardice.
from: Sushant Gaurav
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 19:16 IST
In a democratic country like India, I don't see any true secular policy coming into force by my lifetime. As the rule dictated in a democraacy, what the majority says is right, eventhough majoriy of Indians select the corrupt and most inappropriate people for high ofices. The silent minority who doesn't agree with the way the country is run now has only one choice is to raise their voice in a peaceful manner.But at the sametimes not hurting the feelings of believers, corrupts,simply because they are physically and administratively more powerful and can cause physical harm to us without them being made responsible. If things can change in Europe overtime, it may change in our country in few cwnturies. So let us wait until then, try to educate as many as possible that the way we run our life (majority) in India is not acceptable in 21 st century and hope things would change for better.
from: R.Manivarmane
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 19:43 IST
This article is a brave step taken by the author. Religion is important, but anything in excess can be a cause for harm. Religion is not everything, if someone is hurt by the writings or words of someone else, they better keep it to themselves. No one has the right to threaten another individual just because they are hurt by a piece of writing.from: Andrew
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 19:45 IST
Very well written article. Thumbs up Mr.Praveen Swami. The prevention of Mr.Rushdie from attending the Jaipur Literary Festival is an insult to us all secular Indians. We ought to have fought and made our voices heard louder than we managed, lets face it, a handful of religious bullies managed to silence us, sad, very sad indeed. But, this is the best they can manage and it is their weakness not their strength, they have been at this for a long time - blocking reason, burning witches, aiding superstitions, obstructing progress... But they are getting outdated we should fight them with the tools we now have in 2012, Rushdie's words and opinions are available to everyone in the electronic format and cannot be suppressed by any censorship. Lets celebrate free speech, albeit, electronically for now! And watch out for and progress towards better times...
from: Prakash S
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 20:15 IST
Terrific article. I have gained a new found appreciation for this newspaper. We desperately need these kind of bold opinions and ideas to come to the forefront of the national (perhaps even international) debate in order for us to forge a better future for ourselves. There are plenty of people even within India who would lament about the situation outlined in this article but few have shown the kind of courage Mr. Swami and The Hindu have in voicing it out on a large scale. Keep up the great work and I hope this newspaper continues on its path to serve as a catalyst for positive change.from: Varun Sharma
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 20:19 IST
I support the good intent of the article ie., freedom of speech. But what baffles me is lack of understanding of economics. The govt has took over vast amounts of Lands owned by temples, took control over temples' financial aspects, be it Tirumala (world's richest temple) or Srirangam. The article shows as if govt is only perpetuating religious institutions. The truth is, there are many like me who want the religions be protected from the iron fists of govt. The article should have been fair if it dispassionately revealed how much wealth of Hindus is being looted by govt.
from: Vinod Sriperumbuduru
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 20:22 IST
Though I agree with most of the article, but human emotions do have a place in this capitalist, materialistic world. Yes we need to spend on temples, mosques or churches to maintain them, and let our children know how we were, what we were. And coming to Rushdie, what Congress govt did is a big hit to secular India. They were scared where there small chunk of votes (hope they get) in UP will go, which is a final result of not letting Rushdie to India....from: Nataraj KS
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 20:34 IST
Again an excellent article. Unfortunatelly India could not evolve a truley secular and free country.Due to worsening political leadership we are going ahead to medival age in 21 century. Everything is decided on the basis of political loss-gain. Mr.Rushdie has come india several times in past,but this time due to elections in five states political classes make it a controversy. But the burning question is that which type of society or nation we want to build?
from: AMBUJ SRIVASTAVA
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 21:07 IST
What's with figures in Rs. billions? Is this written for a foreign audience? Couldn't you at least have the courtesy to put the equivalent in crores in brackets for us to wrap our heads around these numbers. Oh wait, shouldn't that be the other way round? Quite amazing then to see this in The Hindu, and wonder how editors might have let this pass. from: Jack Frost
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 21:51 IST
I equally despise Rushdies, MFHussains, Tasleens, Kazantzakis for hurting religious sentiments with their blasphemy. As a true Hindu and believer, I can not rejoice in another believer's hurt feelings whether they are Muslims, Christians or Hindus.
from: kalyan
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 22:06 IST
Its a really good and inspiring article. The only glitch in this article is he mixed law and order,Sanitation issues with religion with respect to kumbh mela. There is also difference with respect or Rushdie and Hussain. while Rushdie critically examined the majority faiths of India (his name calling of Lord Rama and Prophet mohammed), the latter was excercising surprisingly strong restraint with respect to artistic creations of one faith, the Irony was not lost.from: vamsi
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 22:31 IST
It is a good article in its support for Salman Rushdie but the argument is sometimes dry and has an atheistic overtone. Moreover, Is it not the responsibility of the State to support all religions equally and therefore help the people of all religions in their mela or piligrimage so that they are smoothly conducted and security is not compromised? The writer or any person can ask the government regarding how much and why it spent on these activities through RTI. how is the author so sure that we are heading towards a theocratic dystopia in the future? The vast majority of Indian population is moderate in its religious views. The only good I see from this article is that we all can do some thinking for ourselves and get some real clarity on what secularism means and how we should increase tolerance with time in our divided world.
from: Kalyan Chakravarthy
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 22:59 IST
Wow!! it indeed is a brainstorming article. The influence of religion on the functioning of state is a huge problem which by the way can never be addressed by the so called caste based politicians who very well know how to tweak the vote bank by promising them caste and religion based lolipops. The situation is not going to change for years to come and that is for sure. even in a country like USA it is almost impossible for someone who calls himself an agnostic or an atheist to run for presidential elections. It is sad to know that such huge amounts are being spent by the state for religious ceremonies , while neglecting the issues of the society. Religion is a flawed concept which is bestowed upon the young minds, not allowing them to question the faith. Rational thinking and an open mindset is on the verge of extinction..... from: Nidhin
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 23:11 IST
The article is well written.It is difficult to prescribe any single or common solution. India is an ancient country with an oldest surviving civilization. It has still preserved in some form or other a tradition which is common to four corners of the country. Within this fold new schools evolved with new thinking and this transformation was always peaceful. As India took the situation for granted, it became victim of foreign aggression which introduced an aggresive and alien religious order.The tenets of ancient civilization and religious order survived. Indians of the ancient order find no reason to give up all that they preserved over several millenniums and they have reason to give too much of space for aggressive and colonial religious practices to interfere in the tradition they have been practicing, in the name of secularism. All Indians need social reform without any distinction of caste, creed and community. We have build egalitarian society. All Indians should prosper.
from: S.V.Srikantia
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 23:15 IST
@Raamganesh either you misinterpreted or don't know what actually Rushdie did.. I am not against expressing or holding your view about religion or the religious beliefs or ideas.you have your choice to make... But what persons like Rushdie (or M.husan) do is that they are not interested in ideas.what they are interested is to gain publicity by hurting the felling of common people......What Rushdie did in Satanic versus..He criticized those personalities which brought the religion. if he was against an idea or belief then why to target those personalities...these things only bring violence and nothing....There are many persons i know who are against religious beliefs and ideas and also they write articles on it,but never attack the religious personalities or gods..Acts like Rushdie did must be stopped,so that we don't give a bad figure of "freedom of speech" to religious haunted population.from: Rahul Kumar Jat
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 23:36 IST
It is unacceptle kumbamelah function linked with spending nature of govt.It is the duty of govt to protect people.people have the right whereever they want to go or assemble.
from: suresh
Posted on: Jan 21, 2012 at 23:40 IST
The simplistic logic of the atheists blinds them to the truth. While you talk about the state support to different religious faiths, you conveniently forget to mention how for all Hindu places of worship which receive donations, the state runs the 'boards' and decides what is done of those funds. While for 'minorities' it lets them use the funds for their own (often proselytizing) use !! So if a Hindu goes on a Mansarovar yatra, apparently funded by the state, dont forget that the hindus have paid many more times that for the government to fund its programs using religious funds. How about that Mr.Swami? The arrogance of the atheist blinding you to the truth ? from: Gunjan
Posted on: Jan 22, 2012 at 00:04 IST
Fantastic article! A must-read look at how today's version of fascism - religious extremism - has acquired legitimacy and state support. From outlawing beef, books, and critical thought, to suppressing personal liberties and human rights, to wasting state funds on religious rituals that are holdovers from medieval times, and even justifying violence against anyone who dares express dissent or even tries to break free of these regressive shackles, the crimes of religion - and the religious - are many. India - and the world - will be a better place when religious dogma is recognised for the harm it does. Jokes apart, fans of Star Wars, LoTR, Harry Potter, and even Twilight have as legitimate a claim to state support and protection as established and 'organised' forms of medieval fantasies.
from: Vaibhav Sharma
Posted on: Jan 22, 2012 at 00:36 IST
Dear Author, i really appreciate your points where you highlighted the Religious symposium being performed despite enormous societal problems. But there are few points where i am concerned. Esp "spurious Secularism". first of all society can not engrave in the vicinity of Barbarism. Traditions and cultures are the ways via which we are connected to each other, nature and our surroundings where we live. The problem lies in the extension of these traditions to myths, and then finally, myths to the over-belief in them. This is the transgression of human beings, to find the solution of their problem(when they have no idea what to do else), and sometimes to prove themselves superior to a person other with a similar belief but a with a diff sense, leading to communal tensions and disharmony in the society, hampering the rights of citizens.from: Chitrabasu Khare
Posted on: Jan 22, 2012 at 01:10 IST
A very well written article.Our state and the religion have a symbiotic relationship.You always see someone trying to flare up religious sentiments as soon as elections are around the corner.The state insidiously aligns with 'electorate fate deciding' community.This Rushdie's episode brings to mind Taslima Nasreen getting attacked by elected representatives in Hyderabad and government letting them off scotfree.
from: Vinod
Posted on: Jan 22, 2012 at 01:11 IST
There is NO freedom of speech without hurt. They always co-exist. With out this freedom of speech, Independent India would not be possible. Even if it hurts we have to do what is the right thing to do. In this world even one has right to have an opinion. We can't go on and kill people just because they don't agree with you. If there is no diverse thinking we wouldn't have so many religions. It is say that we have to spend so much time on this still even so of achievement in this world. from: naveen
Posted on: Jan 22, 2012 at 03:28 IST
The Kumbh Mela happens once every 12 years in India. The Haj happens every year in another country, yet India subsidises it. The entire article compares apples and oranges like this and fails to say the real thing - Rushdie cannot come to India because Islamic fundamentalism is alive and well here,and that is what has killed Indian secularism.
from: James Gurung
Posted on: Jan 22, 2012 at 04:00 IST
There is nothing new or original, Same old wine in a new bottle. But nicely put. All of us know our brand of secularism is a sham...Till such time we do not divorce religion from state,peace willremain a dream. The charming grace is that HINDU has become bold enough to accommodate an article of this calibre which normally would have come under the ccensors axefrom: chandrasekhara Ramanna
Posted on: Jan 22, 2012 at 04:50 IST
This is a very disturbing article. A person like Mr. Rushdie may have written a book that wins literary acclaim, but if it is going to incite people and cause violence in a country, it is better to ban his publishings. Why are people praising books that dwelve into Gandhi's sex life? Why is that so important? Why don't we try to learn what Gandhi taught? Maybe, if the so-called liberals did that, they would waste a lot of their time glorifying ideals that are frankly not that important for the overall population. The overall population probably cares about food, shelter and basic issues of economics. Some liberals on this forum have glorified the US system. US secular policies in education have led to high rate of teenage pregnanices, breakdown of any kind of societal order in sexual relations which in-turn leads to destructive tragedies for families ( I have seen many examples of this). Our culture promotes values of society, ethics, which we should value.
from: Vijay R.
Posted on: Jan 22, 2012 at 06:33 IST
"India's secular state is in a state of slow-motion collapse. The contours of a new theocratic dystopia are already evident." This is what happens when politicians play vote bank politics for narrow electoral gains. While all parties play the caste and religion cards, the Congress Party which has been in power at the Centre for more years than any of the other parties has the dubious distinction of not only starting this despicable practice (that is dividing the country) but being the main proponent of it. from: krishna
Posted on: Jan 22, 2012 at 06:46 IST
The Author has forgotten to state that the state has taken over "Hindu" temples along with their assets and uses the funds liberally and not touched a Church or a Mosque. We owe that much to our secularism.
from: Krishnan
Posted on: Jan 22, 2012 at 07:52 IST
The author has made a strong case for restoration of credentials of the present secular state in our country. His arguments are powerful. Undoubtedly the government could have checked the religious bigots who dictate terms to others and prevent authors like Rushdie from attending the literary festival. But the religious impulse in individuals doesn't die so easily as has been proven by many revolutions such as Russian or Chinese and dry or cold reason may not satisfy one and all and people. So, no to bigotry but no need to glorify so called "Reason" that has failed to understand the common people and their opposition to coercive secular state that is whimsical. from: J.Ravindranath
Posted on: Jan 22, 2012 at 08:00 IST
Is there any country in the world which does not sponsor some activities
of some religion, some time or other ? Secularism, like Democracy is a
myth...Secularism, as it is practised in India, is not detachment from
religion...instead it is some attachment to all religion, and the degree
of attachment varies according to the current politico-social
situation....
of some religion, some time or other ? Secularism, like Democracy is a
myth...Secularism, as it is practised in India, is not detachment from
religion...instead it is some attachment to all religion, and the degree
of attachment varies according to the current politico-social
situation....
from: Mohan
Posted on: Jan 22, 2012 at 09:33 IST
All this sounds good on paper. Thing is, we all like to play monday-morning quarterback but none of us (including the author) have been in a position where we have had to decide on such sensitive topics. Say Rushdie was allowed to make an appearance and communal violence erupted as a result. We would be then criticizing the authorities for that decision. from: Balaji
Posted on: Jan 22, 2012 at 09:52 IST
Praveen Swami's article is undermined by his quoting (1) the Christian fanatic John Dayal who is hand in glove with American evangelists. Since JD himself is dedicated to advancing his own faith through aggressive and often illegal evangelism his pontifications on secularism are sheer hypocrisy. Moreover this same individual used to write for hate sites such as Dalitstan.org which called for balkanization of India. Such is his activism. (2) the chauvinist Meera Nanda who spews venom against Hinduism (and even Buddhism) yet finds it fit to accept grants from the very protestant Templeton foundation which is dedicated to advancing Christian idioms like "intelligent design". Wonder where her rationalism goes then. Swami fails to mention the "secular" govt. taking over Hindu temples and channeling its earnings for largely non-Hindu causes. I am sure John Dayal or Meera Nanda doesn't have a problem with this subversion of Hindu institutions so it probably wasn't worth bringing up.
from: Manas Prakash
Posted on: Jan 22, 2012 at 10:08 IST
is'nt there a fallacy in the argument by the author about the state spending on religious festivals? The state is NOT spending on GOD but its citizens who engage in a multidimensional socio-cultural-spiritual activity going on since times immemorial as an inalienable part of human activity satisfying human needs. So far as the question of stifling or banning cotroversial opinions is concerned, remember that evolution and reform started and flourished only because of the questioning by honest thinkers who had to stand against the ire of conformist, tradional, closed minded fandamentalists mostly with vested interests.from: Kunwar
Posted on: Jan 22, 2012 at 10:30 IST
No comments:
Post a Comment