The MF Husain tamasha

Just by act of sheer coincidence when I wrote about the government of India’s selective enforcement of laws when it came to MF Hussain, over the last 24 hrs. news of MF Husain’s acceptance of Qatari nationality is a big deal in India. Well the (pseudo) seculars are up in arms. “It is a great insult to our Nation, We should immediately end his Exile”, “Government should provide security to him” is the routine chant in all the newspapers. Everybody is showering praise on “Qatar on bestowing this honor on him…”, “Don’t we have erotic sculpures in our temples” is a common shout. Well, I would have been surprised (as a real secularist) only if the reactions had been otherwise -- amongst that lot that goes for intelligentsia in the media in India. Shall we pause, catch up our breath and take an honest look…

1. “It is a great insult to our Nation, We should end his Exile” – Nothing could be farther from the truth. India didn’t expel Hussain, nor a fundamentalist brigade exile him for matter. The simple fact is Mr. Husain ran away from the law and is a fugitive wanted by many Indian courts, evading several warrants of arrest. Now, pause let that sink into your head. Even for a pseudo secular, that shouldn’t be too difficult to grasp, isn’t it ? Mr. Husain has the utmost freedom to end his exile, he can catch the next immediate flight to India and end it – for himself. Unless of course the pseudo seculars are asking for the government to pony up the charges for a ticket, I for one fail to see what role the government has in this, or for that matter anybody else. End the Exile Mr. Husain…

2. “Government should provide security to him” – Why, as far as I know Mr. Husain hasn’t painted the prophet or any of his wives in the nude, so why he should need security in India is something that I fail to understand as well. If he ended his exile, obeyed all the warrants and judgments given so far, he will have full and total security -- in Jail.

3. “Qatar bestowing an honor” – He is being bestowed this “honor” for having sculpted something for the wife of the sheikh. Since, he has been honored I am sure that he didn’t paint her or the prophet with the same artistic freedom that he did to Godess Saraswati and Sita. Try that Mr. Husain I want to see for how many minutes you last in the Gulf… If you can escape alive, I for one will lead a movement to even commute all the sentences you will get in India.

4. “We have erotic sculptures in our temples” – Yes we do. Hinduism accepts sex as an essential element of life and existence, nothing more nothing less. You will even find sculptures, of European and chinese travellers, in temples recently built. If one were to say that hindus were followers of Confucius or Christianity based on that would that be correct ? Indra and Kama deva are the guardians of sex and sensuality in the religion and it is portrayed as such. You will never see a sita sitting on Hanuman’s Phallus or Nude saraswati in the temples. I challenge anyone to prove otherwise.

If it had been a non-indian who had done this without understanding of the people, culture and religions of India, it is somewhat forgivable. For someone, who has grown up in India fully aware of culture and reverence with which deities are held by Hindus, it is unconscionable to do this… It is a shame that (pseudo) seculars are either unwilling and unable to see the reason in all this. If only they had said the truth, "Since someone insulted Hinduism, it is OK, let him be free" at least for saying the truth I would have had a favorable opinion on them.

Parting, I have included the excerpt from Justice Kapoor’s judgment convicting MF Husain in 2004, I can’t imagine a more profound statement on this…

"If one has been granted unlimited freedom, one is required or expected to use it for good purpose and not with malicious intention, to defame or degrade religious deities may be mythological, as these immortals are held in highest esteem and over a period become part of one's day to day religious life to such an extent that anything adverse said or printed or painted hurts the religious feelings immensely. Any objectionable, demeaning caricature or painting of religious deities or gods or goddesses of any particular religion -- creates disharmony and ill will amongst different communities. Even if it is presumed that such a painting is a piece of art still one cannot be oblivious of the fact that depiction of these deities or goddesses in full nudity comes within the mischief of deliberate and malicious act intended to outrage religious feelings of concerned religion as these goddesses are worshiped by crores of people. .... Under the garb of freedom of expression no person can be allowed to hurt the religious feelings of any class of people. This should be known more to the petitioner who belongs to a different religion. If the petitioner wants to gauge the depth and the unflinching nature of religious feelings he may venture and try his hand at his own or any other religion and see how sensitive religious feelings and beliefs are. Such acts promote enmity between different groups on grounds of religion and arc prejudicial to maintenance of harmony. It is the effect that is guiding and determining criteria."