Critiques are fun to read,they give you insight into the matters and shows you the less seen side of the matters, they explore what might have been missed by your less analytical/knowledgeable mind. Similar kind of critiques I came across to read at three different places First, in the famous Gujarati magazine 'Safari', Second in the autobiography of now dejected/rejected L.K.Advani, Third in the book titled 'India after Gandhi' by eminent historian Ramchandra Guha. All pointed to the same story and rendered same conclusions namely the notorious incident when in the year 1951 Somnath Temple was reconstructed and was inaugurated by then the president of India Dr. Rajendra Prasad, Jawaharlal Nehru protested the move of Dr. Rajendra Prasad to inaugurate the Somnath Temple because he believed that by doing that Dr. Rajendra Prasad was violating the policy of secularism of the state by actively participating into the religious activity of the people as an incumbent of the presidency. And here comes the whole universe of criticism on Nehru for his so called allergy-towards-hinduism gesture. Dr. Rajendra Prasad when protested by Nehru replied that he was not becoming pro-hindu and he would have also attended the inauguration of a mosque or a Gurudwara or a synagogue if invited. It was a master stroke from Dr.Prasad if we consider the tone of critiques. Nehru believed that President should not attend any religious ceremony officially in contrast Dr.Prashad believed that the President should attend every religious ceremony. Our above mentioned critics speak in the favor of Dr.Prasad and severely criticizes Nehru for his allergy toward religions. The views of the magazine Safari and L.K. Advani can be understood because the former is covertly and the latter is overtly saffron colored. The case of Ramchandra Guha is curious he calls himself 'nehruvian' and yet he seems to have criticized him.
Majority will believe the view of Dr.Prasad to be just and a few will believe both views to be equally right. I believe the Nehruvian view to be the only correct option. Let us rephrase both of the views Dr.Prasad's view is "the government should belong to(or practice) every religion." and the Nehru's "The governmentn should belong to(or practice) no religion." both are equally good if life is perfect. But if we consider the rightness of any view on the basis of the consequences it effects I favor Nehruvian view. If the ministers have the right to participate in any religious ceremony they will inevitably tend to favor their own religions, not to mention its the direct connection with vote bank politics. And if you happen to live in Gujarat you can't fail to notice the trend. I attended, when I was in highschool, a congregation at a temple at my home town and the invitee was the CM, Narendra Modi. And there is a rule of thumb that you can't glorify a religion on its own merit, you have to do it by belittling the other religions and that religion too must not be the geographically farther one because it doesn't give you any political mileage. What a waste of time would it be if you compare hindusm with Confucianism practiced in China. So the favorite option was the Islam he maligned that religion obliquely. On the other hand imagine if any minister is not allowed to participate in any religious ceremony or something like that, no religious mud-slinging and no provocation take place. And this kind of approach is particularly necessary in the pluralistic society as ours. Religion must must be considered as one's private affairs and the state has nothing to do with it at all. If one wants to go to Mecca-Medina it strictly is the kind of foreign tourism and the facilities provided should be on a par with any normal traveling. The plethora of problems start when state recognizes the religions as something non-private like schooling and employment. In the Nehruvian view people will eventually have to accept that their feelings are confined within their neural networks and the outside world bears no concern for it. We are going on the exact opposite trend people believe that their feelings are universal and as believable as E=mc^2 and how can the other people not feel the same? And here starts everything from religious bigotry to multiform civil code. So the big trouble is multi-religious government and the first step towards the solution is to get the government ordained in total atheism.
"I bless the the reconstruction of Somnath temple but the fund for the reconstruction must be raised from the community only not from the state"
- The immortal wisdom from the Mahatma Gandhi(recalling from memory not ad verbatim)
Saturday, June 20, 2009
Friday, June 12, 2009
Mundane affairs, let it remain mundane....
Ok so the story goes like this, the other day I went to Gujarat University reading room at about 10 in the morning. While entering into the library I was stopped by the desk clerk, and was asked to show my i-card, I went to the desk but when I was taking out my wallet for the i-card, I heard him say “what are you wearing? With this type of clothes, you are not allowed to enter. Go and get it changed and then come.” I was startled by his rebuke, I realized I had put on a 3/4th pants, and to this pants he had an objection. It was scorching heat outside and another round trip to my hostel would cost me 2kms, so sensing the imminent dehydration I urged him to let me come in only this time and promised him to be cautious from next time,
“sir please let me go inside for today only, I would certainly be cautious from tomorrow, I am coming from far away” I requested.
“so what even if you are coming from Gandhinagar?, rule is rule, this is the temple of education, tomorrow you will come wearing underwear only.” he said, totally unmoved and indifferent to my troubles.
I was fuming. First, because that moron doesn’t know the difference between 3/4th pants and a mere underwear. Second, because I couldn’t understand what the hell was the connection between being in an education institution and wearing comfortable clothes? Girls were openly allowed to wear 3/4ths. And how on earth can it be possible that when a girl shows her legs it’s within the decorum of the library and when boys do the same it becomes downright obscenity. Perhaps they don’t like the legs of boys because they are hairy but my legs were not so hairy (FYI: the librarian was a female, and that too a fastidious one I infer). We argue with each other for next 5 odd minutes but all was in vain. But I could not quit or say I could not afford to quit.
“ I am ready to give my apology in written if you let me in.” I said finally.
“Don’t argue with me go to librarian m’am she will answer you.” Expectedly he remained unmoved.
We went into the library building to meet mrs.librarian , unfortunately librarian had not yet come. So he told me to wait outside until she comes. I waited for a few minutes; meanwhile I found no person sitting at the desk and slipped into the reading room hurriedly. My wish to meet the female librarian of the Gujarat University library in her office in a 3/4th pants thus remained unfulfilled.
Now why did I bother to write about this apparently trivial incident? Reason is simple, I hate this kind of senselessness and I want to express my trouble at the top of my lung. People go to the reading room in order to read properly and that should be the only thing what matters, and somehow people are a lot with ease in their 3/4ths. If one can wear something in day-to-day life without getting the eyes frowned upon, why can’t he wear the same in the reading rooms? Nobody is going to come into the library and take his photographs and publish them into the next day’s news paper. And in general what the hell is the relation between good education and a particular type of clothing? Einstein could have found equally good theories in pyjamas, or Hubble could have found Hubble’s law in a chaddi if they wished so. Then why do we need this martinet discipline in our education institutions? Strict discipline may be necessary for the defense forces but for all general students it’s an unbearable tyranny. Excessive discipline of excessive liberty both hinders the healthy development of a student. The root of this entire misconception lies in our stereotypes about the education, if you ask me. We consider education as divine and the teachers as corresponding deities and Indians have intrinsic propensity to screw up whatever they consider divine, look at all the famous shrines, look at the condition of sacred rivers, look at the big religious gatherings and you will understand my point. We consider short/fashionable clothing as an evil permeated by west and bollywood, and our divinity has two peculiar aspects, First it should be impervious for western influence and Second it must not be maligned by fashion, however it is perfectly allowable to make one’s life akin to hell. Thanks to the crazy influence of ancient Vedas that we senselessly believe that education must be taken in total asceticism, student can’t have fun while studying because all kind of fun deviates him from the education. These idiots cant understand that the uncontrollable longing for the fun(mobiles,bikes,fashionable clothes etc.) also deviates a student from the study. These idiots can’t understand the difference between moderation and excess, gourmet and gourmand. Excess is bad whether it’s in indulgence or in prohibition. Prohibition is not a viable solution where regulation is needed. Look at the students in west, they do everything during their schooling from sex to parties and yet they give the kind of the results not even remotely imaginable from our students. There is a good way to change towards betterment, remove the status of education as a divine thing and treat it as a mundane affair, stop worshipping the deities of education and start revering the greatest scientists, leaders, writers, artists. And above all stop glorifying the virtue of faith and start glorifying the virtue of questioning. Ok I think it’s too far I’ve digressed from the main topic. So let us finish.
“sir please let me go inside for today only, I would certainly be cautious from tomorrow, I am coming from far away” I requested.
“so what even if you are coming from Gandhinagar?, rule is rule, this is the temple of education, tomorrow you will come wearing underwear only.” he said, totally unmoved and indifferent to my troubles.
I was fuming. First, because that moron doesn’t know the difference between 3/4th pants and a mere underwear. Second, because I couldn’t understand what the hell was the connection between being in an education institution and wearing comfortable clothes? Girls were openly allowed to wear 3/4ths. And how on earth can it be possible that when a girl shows her legs it’s within the decorum of the library and when boys do the same it becomes downright obscenity. Perhaps they don’t like the legs of boys because they are hairy but my legs were not so hairy (FYI: the librarian was a female, and that too a fastidious one I infer). We argue with each other for next 5 odd minutes but all was in vain. But I could not quit or say I could not afford to quit.
“ I am ready to give my apology in written if you let me in.” I said finally.
“Don’t argue with me go to librarian m’am she will answer you.” Expectedly he remained unmoved.
We went into the library building to meet mrs.librarian , unfortunately librarian had not yet come. So he told me to wait outside until she comes. I waited for a few minutes; meanwhile I found no person sitting at the desk and slipped into the reading room hurriedly. My wish to meet the female librarian of the Gujarat University library in her office in a 3/4th pants thus remained unfulfilled.
Now why did I bother to write about this apparently trivial incident? Reason is simple, I hate this kind of senselessness and I want to express my trouble at the top of my lung. People go to the reading room in order to read properly and that should be the only thing what matters, and somehow people are a lot with ease in their 3/4ths. If one can wear something in day-to-day life without getting the eyes frowned upon, why can’t he wear the same in the reading rooms? Nobody is going to come into the library and take his photographs and publish them into the next day’s news paper. And in general what the hell is the relation between good education and a particular type of clothing? Einstein could have found equally good theories in pyjamas, or Hubble could have found Hubble’s law in a chaddi if they wished so. Then why do we need this martinet discipline in our education institutions? Strict discipline may be necessary for the defense forces but for all general students it’s an unbearable tyranny. Excessive discipline of excessive liberty both hinders the healthy development of a student. The root of this entire misconception lies in our stereotypes about the education, if you ask me. We consider education as divine and the teachers as corresponding deities and Indians have intrinsic propensity to screw up whatever they consider divine, look at all the famous shrines, look at the condition of sacred rivers, look at the big religious gatherings and you will understand my point. We consider short/fashionable clothing as an evil permeated by west and bollywood, and our divinity has two peculiar aspects, First it should be impervious for western influence and Second it must not be maligned by fashion, however it is perfectly allowable to make one’s life akin to hell. Thanks to the crazy influence of ancient Vedas that we senselessly believe that education must be taken in total asceticism, student can’t have fun while studying because all kind of fun deviates him from the education. These idiots cant understand that the uncontrollable longing for the fun(mobiles,bikes,fashionable clothes etc.) also deviates a student from the study. These idiots can’t understand the difference between moderation and excess, gourmet and gourmand. Excess is bad whether it’s in indulgence or in prohibition. Prohibition is not a viable solution where regulation is needed. Look at the students in west, they do everything during their schooling from sex to parties and yet they give the kind of the results not even remotely imaginable from our students. There is a good way to change towards betterment, remove the status of education as a divine thing and treat it as a mundane affair, stop worshipping the deities of education and start revering the greatest scientists, leaders, writers, artists. And above all stop glorifying the virtue of faith and start glorifying the virtue of questioning. Ok I think it’s too far I’ve digressed from the main topic. So let us finish.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)