Because it's been too long since we've had a good flamewar.

Because this made me grin.

Because Aadisht (along with most of the list) has been too silent of late.

Udhay

http://www.aadisht.net/blog/2014/01/31/why-hindutva-is-like-dog-breeding/

Why Hindutva is Like Dog Breeding

I have had an insight. Admittedly it was one of those insights which you
get at 1 am when you can’t sleep because you had the last cappuccino of
the day a little too late in the day; but despite the circumstances in
which it arose, I think it is a valuable insight. And it is basically
this: the two extreme views of what Hinduism actually is correspond
exactly to the two extreme views dog lovers have about how you should go
about getting a dog as a pet.

Explaining the analogy means I will have to first provide context.

For many years, I was mystified by the fact that Hindutvawadis could
hold these two beliefs simultaneously:

    Hinduism is really awesome
    Hinduism is under grave, horrible threat and must be preserved at
all costs from any combination of:
        Sickular Media
        CONgis
        Love Jihad
        Vatican Missionaries
        The Nehru-Gandhi dynasty
        Ramachandra Guha
        Twitter Secret Santa

These simultaneous beliefs would manifest into calls for legal and
illegal action against anybody who criticised or denigrated Hinduism in
any way, no matter their actual intent.

I, and other likeminded people would be bewildered and say things like
“If Hinduism is so great, surely it can withstand these very minor
criticisms.” In fact, it was really polite people like Salil Tripathi
who would say such things. I used to say much more outrageous things
like “Boss if Hinduism is this vulnerable to criticism, why are you even
bothering with something so weak? Start practicing a more robust
religion like Islam or Thor-worship or some such. Persisting with
Hinduism can only lead to tears and misery as you watch it collapse
around you.”

It was not until this month that I realised that this argument was
totally pointless because it assumes that we were thinking of Hinduism
in the same way. We weren’t. I was thinking of Hinduism in the way that
Gautam John and Anoopa Anand think of Indian Pi Dogs. They were thinking
of Hinduism in the way that pug owners regard their pugs1 (or actually,
any purebreed dog, but pugs are fashionable these days, so the analogy
becomes clearer – and actually more forceful, as we’ll see later on). In
fact, considering how loaded the terms Hindutvawadi and liberal have
become these days, using the terms Pug view of Hinduism and Pi View of
Hinduism might actually be more enlightening in the general discourse2.
More so if you consider that Hindutvawadi could refer to actual
behaviour or actions, while Pug View and Pi View very clearly refer to
mindsets.

If you are Good Guy Gautam, or somebody similar, then resilience,
health, and being robust are necessary conditions of being awesome. You
think pi dogs make great pets and companions because they’re healthy,
active, and friendly. A wide genetic stock, you feel, allows for a
pleasing variety of very resilient specimens. Extending the analogy to
religion, what you like most about Hinduism are the practices or beliefs
that are easy to live with and carry on, and its ability to absorb
influences from other religions if they’re good ideas.

But if you’re on the other extreme, you’re not bothered about health and
resilience at all. What you’re concerned about is pure breeding, even if
the result of this breeding creates an animal that is so strangely
shaped that more than two out of every three of its kind have diseases
that are directly traceable to its weird shape. The strange, disease
prone, almost nonviable form of the pug (which, along with the modern
bulldog, exemplifies selective breeding run amok) is a feature, not a
bug, because it makes the pug look so cute and distinctive.

Extending this to religion, the weirdest parts of Hinduism, that make it
so difficult and cumbersome to practice, and which also seem so totally
pointless to the disinterested observer, are precisely what the devoted
but threatened promoter of Hinduism thinks are the whole point. It is
irrelevant that fasting for your husbands’ good health, letting your own
or other peoples’ gotra or caste influence your decisions, practicing a
sattvik diet, or going through elaborate rituals to qualify as a proper
Hindu have not made them happier, more prosperous, or more productive
than the rest of the world that has happily gotten along without all
these.  It is because it is difficult to maintain, easy to go wrong, and
serves little purpose, that this sort of Hinduism is so valuable – it
shows that for hundreds of years, you’ve managed to keep something
largely unviable going in its pure form.

Actually, an obsession with purity is the kinder interpretation of why
the Pug View of Hinduism likes the bizarre bits of Hinduism so much. I
could be more conspiracy minded (like the Pughindus themselves) and
suggest that they want Hinduism to be this unsustainable so that, like a
pug, it is completely dependent on the owner and in its power. But this
would be mean. Besides, there’s some other support for the hypothesis
that it’s driven by an obsession with purity: their insistence that
Hinduism is a way of life and not a religion and so you can only be born
a Hindu and can’t become one through practice.

It also is supported by how horrified Pughindus are at the thought of
other Hindus doing anything that is not found within Pughinduism, no
matter whether this activity is good or bad. A Pughindu is appalled at
people playing Twitter Secret Santa because it might be a covert attempt
to spread Christianity. It doesn’t matter that by playing secret Santa
you have successfully detached the gift giving part of Christmas from
the accepting Jesus Christ as your saviour part of Christianity. It also
doesn’t matter that the more people who aren’t practicing Christians go
around wishing others a merry Christmas in a spirit of goodwill and
warmth, the more it actually changes Christianity from the violent and
genocidal religion that Hindutvawadis say they hate, to an actual
religion of brotherhood and love that can’t threaten Hinduism with
genocide. It doesn’t even matter that prosocial behaviour like gifting
is correlated with an increase in happiness for the gifter and not just
the giftee. The suggestion of cross breeding and tainting the bloodline
is enough to horrify them.

Tragically, this obsession with purity puts Pughindus makes the suffer
from dreadful envy and a Catch 22 situation. By keeping their vision of
Hinduism pure, they have made it either impossible, unappealing, or too
time-consuming to practice; and thus people keep deserting it in favour
of Islam, Sikhism, Christianity, Buddhism, or secular humanism. Worse is
when these people keep mocking Pughinduism for being so odd; which then
leads to them crying up and down3 about how Hinduism is threatened; much
as pug owners keep crying up and down about veterinary bills.

Which means that Pughindus see Islam in particular the way pug-owners
see Indian street dogs. Pug owners look at pi dogs, and envy their
robust good health, and wish that their pug were as healthy and capable,
but are horrified at the thought of breeding their pug with it, or even
letting it into their houses. The Pughindus are miserable when they see
the united front that Muslims appear to present, and wish that Hinduism
itself had it4, without realising that it is the type of Hinduism they
practice that makes it impossible to present that united front.

Also, if you agree that the Pug View of Hinduism looks at Islam the way
posh people think of street dogs –  healthier, gregarious, but also
dirty and not something they want around – you will suddenly understand
why a certain analogy that compared massacre victims to a puppy under
the wheels of a car makes perfect sense.

Meanwhile, Pihindus, who are quite happy to practice a mongrel Hinduism
with lots of cross breeding in its pedigree are not concerned about the
health of their Hinduism at all, and don’t suffer this agonising envy.
About religion, anyway. They might feel envious about other things like
smartphones or whatnot.

But the upshot is that while they share a religion, Pughindus and
Pihindus see it in completely different ways. And until this fundamental
disagreement over what it is they are actually talking about is
resolved, nothing useful can ever  come out when they talk about their
own religion. There will be only noise and no light, until we have a
reformer who can talk to the two sides, explain the difference they have
that must be reconciled, and perhaps, bring about the end of the
religious equivalent of puppy mills. Until then, we will keep struggling
on, talking but not understanding. It is very sad, but there it is.



Footnotes

1: Full Disclosure: Some months ago, I had a highly unpleasant meeting
with somebody who, over the course of the meeting, whined about not
enjoying their holiday in the Philippines because it was so third world,
about how they didn’t want to take up their only job offer because it
was in Mumbai which was unsafe compared to living in the Delhi family
home, and how their undergraduate class in Delhi was full of uncool
students from small town India and Delhi University should reserve seats
for people from Delhi who otherwise wouldn’t even be able to get in with
high marks (which I found a particularly staggering demand considering
that this person had gone to America for their MBA). The person in
question also had a pug, which was paralysed, and in a heart rending
display of the problems only the very rich face, kept slipping while
attempting to walk, because the floors in the house were of marble. It
is possible that I am now contemptuous towards pug owners as a class,
based only on my animosity towards this one spilling over.

2: This may seem like a really arrogant expectation, but ‘Sainath
Fallacy‘ has now slowly started being used by a wide variety of people
on Twitter, two years after I coined it. So it may soon make the jump to
mainstream media; and Pi View and Pug View may follow a similar
trajectory. I can dream.

3: The phrase ‘crying up and down’ is of course one that was much
beloved by HIM. It is used in a spirit of focusing the mind on the
divine, but should not be allowed to degenerate into mere idol worship.
Even after HIS departure, we have found HIM in other manifestations.

4: When Pughindus wish that Hindus were united, the subtext is that
other Hindus should become more Pughindu and do the hard work of
changing their lifestyle by, for instance, going vegetarian or spending
money and time on elaborate rituals or pilgrimages. Pughindus never
consider working for Hindu unity by becoming like other Hindus who, when
they hear Radha, dance instead of entering an outraged frenzy. This
insistence on other people doing all the hard work has a parallel in the
way it’s usually Indian pug owners’ domestic servants who have to clean
up the pug’s poop.


-- 
((Udhay Shankar N)) ((udhay @ pobox.com)) ((www.digeratus.com))

Reply via email to