[The comment, reproduced below, had been penned before the plea for
anticipatory bail was filed before the Supreme Court, in the process,
inviting a very controversial comment by the CJI, apart from the plea being
rejected outright.

Hence, the write-up goes into the underlying basic issue.
In a pretty much commendable manner.

《But Indians also need ask another question: If there’s any way of moving
forward without hurting some deeply-held beliefs. From the Church’s war
against heliocentrism and Darwinism to more recent struggles around
everything from genome research to gender, almost all progress has involved
confrontations with faith. Being open to blasphemy — to the possibility
that our most cherished beliefs are untrue — has been, and will be, key to
human progress.
...
Rushdie said that humans "shape their futures by arguing and challenging
and saying the unsayable; not by bowing their knee whether to gods or to
men". Hurt feelings are the price of freedom —and it's a price we need to
be willing to pay.》]

https://www.firstpost.com/india/karma-is-indeed-a-bitch-but-theres-more-to-the-abhijit-iyer-mitra-and-konark-temple-battle-5254981.html

Karma is, indeed, a bitch; but there’s more to the Abhijit Iyer-Mitra and
Konark Temple battle

Praveen Swami

Sep 25, 2018 10:26:31 IST

Early on the evening of 27 May, 1953, Erode Venkatappa Ramasamy marched up
to the podium in the Town Hall Maidan in Tiruchirapalli to educate the
audience on his low opinion of Hinduism. In case anyone missed the point,
the Dravida leader proceeded to break apart an idol of Ganesha. Over the
course of his long political war against caste, Ramaswamy, was liberal with
agitprop. He garlanded images of Krishna and Rama with shoes claiming that
these "Aryan gods" considered Shudras "sons of prostitutes".

Now, in the high noon of the Indian republic Ramaswamy helped build, we
have this spectacle: Abhijit Iyer-Mitra — self-described "pro-rich,
anti-poor, farmer-parasite, queer, atheist"; son of Subramanian Swamy's key
aide VS Chandralekha — facing criminal prosecution for offending Hindu
religious sentiment.

That this free speech battle centres not on an epic political struggle, but
a poseur serving up anodyne postmodern irony to millennials, ought take
nothing away from its seriousness.

Iyer-Mitra's purported crime is describing the iconic Konark Temple as a
"humple", based on the explicit representations of sex on its façade.


In addition, he made known his low opinion of Odias and their political
leadership, for which he has been summoned before a privileges committee of
the state Assembly — another potential gateway to prison. In an exemplary
display of unity, the ruling Biju Janata Dal and the Opposition Bharatiya
Janata Party and Congress all back this action.

The ironies haven’t passed unnoticed: Iyer-Mitra had cheered news that two
editors were sentenced to prison by the Karnataka Assembly. He broadcast
less-than-laudatory opinions of the journalist Gauri Lankesh, who was
prosecuted — and then assassinated — for exactly the same crimes he’s now
alleged to have committed.

But there's more to this story than the learning that Karma is, indeed, a
bitch.

Indians have grappled with the tensions between free speech and religious
belief since at least 1924, when Arya Samaj activist Mahashe Rajpal
published the anti-Islam polemic Rangila Rasul — in Urdu, 'the colourful
prophet'. Lower courts condemned Rajpal to prison. Lahore High Court judge
Dalip Singh, though, noted the perils of using the law to assuage hurt
feelings: "If the fact that Musalmans resent attacks on the Prophet was to
be the measure," he reasoned, so might "judgment passed on his character by
a serious historian".

But, fearing communal violence, the colonial state moved to criminalise
blasphemy. Today, Section 295 of the Indian Penal Code, allows for the
punishment of anyone who "destroys, damages or defiles any place of
worship, or any object held sacred by any class of persons". Its cousin,
Section 153A makes it a crime to promote enmity between different groups on
grounds of religion.

>From the persecution of the painter MF Husain to Padmaavat, the Hindu Right
has been enthusiastic in its embrace of the blasphemy laws. In 1993, for
example, the New Delhi-based cultural organisation Sahmat exhibited a panel
recording that, in one Buddhist tradition, Sita was Ram's sister; in a Jain
version, she was the daughter of Ravan. This formed the basis of a criminal
prosecution — even though the existence of these variant readings are
well-documented historical facts.

Laws like these, though, have also served bigots of other other shade. The
police used Section 295 to silence writers who spoke in defence of Salman
Rushdie at the Jaipur Literary Festival. They deployed it, too, against the
Dalit godman Piara Singh Bhaniarawala, who released a rendition of the Sikh
Bhavsagar Granth, a religious text suffused with miracle stories.

Fraud-buster Sanal Edamaruku was charged with blasphemy by Mumbai
church-goers for pointing out that the drops of water dripping off a statue
of Jesus on Irla Road weren’t holy tears, but leaky plumbing.

There’s been plenty of low farce, too: Mahendra Singh Dhoni was prosecuted
for appearing on a magazine cover as Vishnu, but armed with Lays chips,
Pepsi, Boost and a sneaker; a Hyderabad-based fashion designer was
persecuted for having printed Quranic verses on clothing.

Screen grab of Abhijeet Iyer-Mitra from his Konark Temple video. Twitter
@IyervvalScreen grab of Abhijit Iyer-Mitra from his Konark Temple video.
Twitter @Iyervval
Bloggers, film-makers, journalists — and now, Twitter provocateurs: No one
is safe.

Hearing Ramaswamy's case in 1959, the Supreme Court sided with god. It
urged lower courts "to pay due regard to the feelings and religious
emotions of different classes of persons with different beliefs,
irrespective… of whether they are rational or otherwise". In the decades
since, the right not to be offended has been consistently privileged over
freedom of speech. That all of Odisha’s major parties have backed the
action against Iyer-Mitra illustrates the state of play in stark relief.
Indeed, Punjab's chief minister Captain Amarinder Singh wants to punish
certain acts of blasphemy with life sentences.

This is, it could be argued, unexceptionable: After all, what purpose does
hurting someone's religious beliefs serve? How can pluralistic societies
survive if we are not restrained from hurting each other?

But Indians also need ask another question: If there’s any way of moving
forward without hurting some deeply-held beliefs. From the Church’s war
against heliocentrism and Darwinism to more recent struggles around
everything from genome research to gender, almost all progress has involved
confrontations with faith. Being open to blasphemy — to the possibility
that our most cherished beliefs are untrue — has been, and will be, key to
human progress.

Living in plural societies makes it inevitable that there will be
divergent, even irreconcilable opinions. The test of a society is how it
mediates difference — not how it represses it.

Policing the expression of contentious thoughts only serves to drive
resentments and hatreds underground. Years of blasphemy prosecutions, after
all, have done nothing to still communal or caste hatred in India.

In 864 CE, the great physician Abu Bakr Muhammad Ibn Zakaria al-Razi
committed this thought to paper: "Prophets are imposters". "Religions are
the sole cause of the wars which ravage humanity; they are hostile to
philosophical speculation and to scientific research. The alleged holy
scriptures are books without values". He died surrounded by adoring pupils,
none the worse for his blasphemy.

Later Islamic rulers were less tolerant of dissent — engendering an
intellectual climate characterised by fear and censorship. Eventually, the
Caliphate of Baghdad, one of the greatest civilisations the world has ever
known, atrophied and collapsed.

Rushdie said that humans "shape their futures by arguing and challenging
and saying the unsayable; not by bowing their knee whether to gods or to
men". Hurt feelings are the price of freedom —and it's a price we need to
be willing to pay.


Updated Date: Sep 25, 2018 10:26 AM

-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send an email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to