India Unvarnished

KabuliWallah #83

Its other name is Surah Bani Israel 17:

``Glory be to Him, Who transported His servant one night from Masjidul-Haram to the distant temple (Masjid Aqsa in Arabic), whose surroundings We have blessed, so that We might show him some of our Signs: the fact is that He alone is All-hearing and all-seeing`` 17:1

You are right, that there is no mention of ascetion here. And rest is probably from Hadith.

But as I told you there are numerous sects in Islam because of Hadith, if it were not there would be innumerable sects. Considering the richness of Arabic language with one word conveying many meaning and many interpretations, taking Koran in isolation will lead to innumerable sects.

Moreover Hadith or history is important (to a certain extent) because there is some purpose to it. If not why not the whole Koran came at once telling people ``Look this is your guide from God, so act according to it.``

In Islamic thoughts if there as fundamentalists like Wahhabi, there are people who rationalize. Sir Syed Ahmed Khan was a great rationalizer of Koran. To some extent Maulana Mowdudi is also.

What is the truth nobody knows.

I believe in this Ayah as the essense of Islam that Whether it be jew of christian or Sabi (More like Pankaj) whoever believes in God (one) and do good will have his reward from God.

Moreover, there is a Shariat, called Shariat Mohammedi. But Muslims, Christians, Jews believing in one God have been called Muslims in Koran. Like Abraham was a true Muslim and did not made partners with God.

Anyway since you seem aware little bit about this so I posted this boring discussion.

Moreover God is neither Muslim, nor Christian nor Jewish but God of all creatures but Muslims have Islamized God, Christians have baptised Him and Jews have Jewised (I don`t know correct form) Him.

Response sent by Murad Baig


Dear friends at Chowk

Chowk caught me flat footed when they put up India Unvarnished that I had sent them to `read` many months ago. I was on a holiday with friends at a lovely place above Rishikesh when they decided to get married so my Hindu wife and I saw a lot of both the sacred and the profane of many temples in the Hardwar - Rishikesh area. Immediately thereafter I was flying to Detroit and San Francisco and had no time to respond to your many very interesting letters.

Some of your comments that my observations are sometimes simplistic and insufficiently supported are correct but please allow me to explain.

The essay was written in just four days (with a few subsequent revisions) after a long discussion with one of my Hindutva friends. Both very Hindutva and good friend. Instead of arguing with him I patiently prodded and persuaded him to give full vent to his interpretation of India`s history complete with all it`s myths and prejudices.

The next day I listed the main issues discussed and then proceeded to evaluate their merits. When I filled in the responses to each question my main objective was to puncture some of the prejudices rather than attempt to write a whole new interpretation of India`s history. I have no problem with myths that per se are fine but many unfortunately support destructive prejudices that lead to strife, anger and bitterness.

This explains why `Unvarnished` is a bit slanted towards deflating Hindu myths and prejudice and I would be very happy to join all of you to widen its scope to cover all religions and races. Perhaps we should reposition it into `Hindustan Unvarnished` to cover all people in our lovely but troubled sub-continent.

So far Chowk has put up the first 10 of the 65 questions. Too much discussion seems to have focussed on the first 5 questions concerning race and colour. I had begun on these to try to deflate the sanctity attached to Varnas that are one of the main foundations of the caste system that I frankly detest. It not only affects Hindus but insidiously conditions Muslims, Christians and others as well and is I believe one of the major anchors holding back our progress.

On this subject, however, I have just been reading Jared Diamond`s Pulitzer prize winning `Guns, Germs and Steel that covers `the fates of human societies` from the end of the last and 23rd Ice Age 13,000 years ago. I was 27 hours in the air and at airports returning from San Francisco to Delhi via Detroit and Amsterdam. He well argues that 95% of human history occurred in the Stone Age but that 99% of the history as taught took place in later times.

It is a very good read and gives some interesting data to support these dates:

5 - 9 million years BC - development of humanoids In Africa.

1.5 - 3 million BC - emergence of Homo Erectus (HE) in Africa.

1 million BC movement of HE out of Africa through Asia.

500,000 BC movement of HE to Europe.

50,000 BC Cro Magnon or Modern Man (MM) suddenly almost completely replaces HE at the beginning of the last Ice Age.

40,000 BC MM reaches Australia and 33,000 reaches New Guinea.

20,000 BC MM develops technologies to survive Arctic climates and goes North.

12,000 BC MM reach America. (Some earlier dates are queried)

Diamond convincingly explains many interesting features of human development from small tribal bands to larger tribes to still larger chiefdoms to big states. It is interesting how tribal societies were egalitarian and too preoccupied with their hunting/ gathering to ever be able to sustain a war and aggression. With agriculture, larger settlements with full time managers as Kings and their full time soldiers could develop better killing technologies and overwhelm tribal communities.

Published by W. W. Norton. $15.95. Check it out.

Back to Unvarnished.

I was able to do such a quick Q&A because I have been working on and off for the past 9 years on a book tentatively titled `Reflections in a Sacred Pond` that now is 120,000 words long so many of the points were fresh in my mind.

My sources are from the list with you but I do need to spend a lot of tedious time for the gritty bit of putting exact references that I know will be necessary.

I will soon address many of your individual points.

Why not all collaborate to agree/disagree point by point and add more points so we can all make a great book out of this hasty essay.

With best wishes

Regards

Murad

This is what our `intellectuals` have come to : `deflation`. If there is no more faith in faith, what remains in life but deflation. Let me use a more appropriate word `trivialization`. Meaning no personal disrespect, but it seems as if one single Hindutva(a political philosophy, finally) proponent and some conversations represent the end result of many thousand years of religious development and interplay in many millions of people`s lives. In such a situation even hectic air journeys influence the points one puts down in an apparent `search for truth`.

The Times Of India was better. When the Ganesha idol began drinking milk, they published an `unemotional` article explaining why it happened scientifically. There were no riots, there was no protest only acceptance because in the report there was no disrespect or trivialisation of the power of something as personal as religious belief and finally there is a general acceptance in the public that truth is truth.

I remember reading a article about the Western press coverage of the Ganesha incident. It seems that some in the West rued the loss of faith(not necessarily religious) as a personal and societal motivator. No, but we need their(the West`s) general and vocal acceptance for our own pursuits and philosophies, so maybe I need to furnish references and run a campaign for reviving of faith in the upcoming US Presidential elections, for it to be taken seriously by Indian intellectuals.

The Adi Shakaracharya said, faith and knowledge are like a blind man and a lame man respectively. The former cannot see the destination, the lame man can, but cannot get there without the former`s help. Lets see a recognition that though `salient` facts like Shankaracharya`s life period cannot be resolved even within the closest 100 years, the practice of Hindusim by its current followers does carry some nontrivial weight which doesnot require `deflation`, only clearing of the `underbrush`. Faith doesnot have to be traded in as an exchange for truth, not in Hinduism.

The author`s effectiveness in his noble pursuit of doing away with the power of myths is greatly hampered by his attitude. The caste system and many social evils associated for centuries with the practice of Hindusim can be done away with, and are indeed being done away with by many many others in India, with more effectiveness, sincerity and appreciation for the desired end result of reform than this author has demonstrated.

The efforts in these directions have encountered less resistance than would have been encountered had a majority of Indians really been `blinded` by myths. There are many groups in India who have been engaged in exposing the hollowness of superstitions for many years in street theatre and other media even state television and film. They are doing a better job of it, in my opinion, as did many of the Hindu reformers of this(the 20th) and the last century.

Sadhana

w.r.t Reply #: 86 by Murad Baig/Chowk Staff

What a let-down Murad`s reply is?

[``The essay was written in just four days (with a few subsequent revisions) after a long discussion with one of my Hindutva friends. Both very Hindutva and good friend. Instead of arguing with him I patiently prodded and persuaded him to give full vent to his interpretation of India`s history complete with all it`s myths and prejudices.``]

This ``unemotional examination`` and ``an objective examination of many widely held opinions and myths about India and its history`` was written in just 4 days! without any peer review!! And author wants to shift the blame to Chowk staff to caught him unaware!!! If that is the case (that this was just a draft), Chowk`s editorial policy needs drastic improvement so that no draft version gets published and authors get proper lead time.

BTW, how noble is author to allow his friend to give ``full vent`` to his interpretation?

[``I had begun on these to try to deflate the sanctity attached to Varnas that are one of the main foundations of the caste system that I frankly detest.]

Author really believes that a 4 day effort is enough to do that?

Authors long irrelevant mumble about Jared Diamond`s Pulitzer prize winning `Guns, Germs and Steel`` didn`t add anything to the matter being discussed. Perhaps he will like to stick to the points and either withdraw them or provide proper references.

Regards

Thank you Sadhna, you put it very eloquently.

Kabuli

Before Mr Baig starts another writing spree, he is requested to also answer the queries raised in ``Accent in Kashmir`` article.

To be specific, I request his source on ``Mihirkula`s recent conversion to hinduism``.

Regards

Murad:

What was the motivation behind referring to your ``Hindu wife``? Frankly, the religion of your wife is a personal matter between you and your wife . Its none of our concern. Here are two of my hypothesis as to why you mentioned it:

1. Demostrate your and your wife`s liberal bent or broadly the concept of inter-religious marriages in India.

2. Gain some cover from right wing Hindus who may attack you, somebody with a Muslim name, for challenging Hindu myths.

From all the posts on Chowk, I did not see any evidence of #2 with regard to your articles. So why the gratutious reference to your wife`s religion?

By the way, I am always happy to see people cross boundaries, be they imagined or real.

Murad:

Point raised by Truth #: 91 is an interesting one. Do both of you (you and your wife) go around introducing each other as ``my hindu wife`` and ``my muslim husband``?

Regards

Friend#

Murad article in 4 days may not mean, that his upper chamber was empty before that.

As far as his credentials, I suppose he must be a knowledgeable person even before writing this.

You may be right He is a Muslim and in your world`s largest Demockeracy, he might have to introduce his wife as Hindu to prevent the wrath against Muslim in highly Demockeratic and Sequelar country.

Your stiking post and Gobar thoughts just are a validation of this.

Badbu Kam Karo Janwar.

Even those who have studied Hindu philosophy and its practice as a purely academic subject recognise the `value` of the philosophical underpinnings of its mythology and the fundamental `nonabsolute` or `nonliteral` characteristic of its mythological figures in comparison with the mythology of other religions. The fundamental `nonliteral` nature of its mythology( as opposed to philosophy ) has in the past facilitated reform in religious practice.

The author seems confused because he seems not to acknowledge this fact and seems to think

a. that the political philosophy of `Hindutva` currently prevelant is the same as the Hindu philosophy of the millions of Hindus of India, past and present

b. that to purge the evils of religious practice, the religion as it is practiced or believed in by so many itself should be purged.

c.The uncovering of historical or geographical facts is sufficient to undermine the philosphical authority of Hindu scriptures.

Moreover he doesnot seem to consider of any significance to his stated intentions, the existence of any past or present reform movements.

The caveats to these conclusions are:

a. Hindutva is not Hinduism

b. Purging of religion or religous practice from popular culture has never worked anywhere in the world and has created more problems and violence than it has solved. Do we really want to go down that road ?

c.Reformers of Hindu religious practice ought to have at least a minimum grasp of the philosophical underpinnings to be effective, in my opinion and history shows. In other words, the keys to successful reformation lie within the religion itself. Please look up the `Swadhyaya movement` or see the Shyam Benegal movie `Antarnaad` as just one of countless examples(some `features` of the modern Indian state being one).

If the author wants to instead purge the political philosophy of `Hindutva`, he is most welcome :-).

Sadhana

Response sent by Murad Ali Baig


Hey guys/gals give me a break. You don’t have to stomp on me with hobnail boots/ stilettos.

Can`t I just tell you some unvarnished facts without having to have a motivation.

But as you ask, I must say that I have never found it necessary to declare my own or my wife`s religion as our names say it all. And we both are religious in the sense of believing in a nameless, formless cosmic force but do not subscribe to all the rituals that are considered by many as being fundamental to religion. These were mostly the creation of priests and not of the founding sages or prophets. Many have also degenerated from spiritual to superstitious. I nevertheless do respect the feelings of others and do not fling my skepticism into their faces.

Sadhana has rightly pointed out that the philosophical underpinnings are the core of religions and I greatly respect these. As you will find as the essay unravels, the evolution of the philosophies and the role of reformers are not ignored.

Thank you Krashid for pointing out that the effort of 4 days was not without some substance. I had pointed out in my last note that I have been working on the subject for the past 9 years.

Friend wanted to know about Mihirakula`s killing of Buddhists mentioned in the Kashmir article. There are several sources and A.L.Basham in `The Wonder that was India` says:

``From AD 500 onwards, Western India was in the hands of Huna kings, two of whom, Toramana and his son Mihirkula were apparently mighty monarchs. The latter is remembered by the 7th Century Chinese traveller Hsuan Tsang as a fierce persecutor of Buddhism and in Kashmir… and memories of his sadistic tyranny were still alive in the 12th century when they were recorded by the historian Kulhana.``

I am looking for my exact sources that state that Mihirkula had originally been Buddhist (a recent convert) until convinced by his wife who was a Hindu princess. I will revert. Later Mihirkula was driven from the Northern plains by Narasimha Gupta and killed in Kashmir.

Murad

Response from Murad Baig


Message for Sadhana:

Sadhana, you are right about the importance of myths and I understand that you will react to any efforts to deflate them. As I had said in the beginning, myths are important and are to people what dreams are to individuals. There is however a down side when mythology begins to be treated as something sacred and is used to justify violent or derogatory political or sectarian actions. I love the myths of all societies but abhor the hype that some enthusiastic followers infuse them with. By deflating I don`t want to mock them but to just try to put myths it in a more realistic perspective. Even an alternate perspective.

Regards

Murad

Murad,

My objection is to your phrase ``Mihirkula, recently converted to Hinduism``. This phrase, along with a mention that Islamic rule was tolerant one, just indicated a desire to show hinduism responsible for Mihirkula`s cruelty. Clearly this pharse had no natural place in an article about Kashmir and Cars.

I have already posted references that very clearly indicate that Mihirkula (and his father Tomarana) were part of central asian war-like tribes who were attacking remanants of Gupta empire. These tribes were shaivites (not recent converts) and their destructive assults were finally contained by largely hindu kingdoms of Baladitya Gupta and Narsimha Gupta. Mihirkula `s campaign was purely for material gain and was not a religious campaign. Story of Mihirkula`s wife is a myth, not supported by any historical record.

My second objection is to your unsubstantiated mention to ``Shankaracharya who replaced buddhist temples at Badrinath etc to Hindusim``. Atlease in early India, Buddhism coexisted with various sects of Hinduism. Shrines and temples shared dieties from several sects. Main diety of temple sometimes changed with changes in accpetance of a particular sect with time.

However, no historical records show that Badrinath or Kedarnath were ever Buddhist monasteries.

If you have been observant during your travels to monasteries & temples in Ladakh, Bhutan etc, you will find that still budhhist dieties share place with Rudra and other dieties from Shaivaism.

Will write more once I see your references.

Regards

Dear Murad,

You like anyone else have the right to interpret or postulate an history. But please understand that there are many historians who could offer an explanation quite different from yours to many of the questions you pose.

The construction of Buddhism as an alternative traditional source of Indianness is not new. The best guide on this matter would be Surendranath DasGupta`s tratise ``History of Indian Philosophy`` a 10 volume book. I suggest that you and several readers spare the time to glance through it before arriving at rash conclusions. By the way what you have said adds nothing new to what has been said and is a regurgitation of the by now discredited ``Aryan Invasion Theory`` and its derivations.

For instance scientific evidence about the Sarasvati river does exist and so does evidence of older and more extensive inhabitations along its banks right upto Gujarat.

Another excellent contemporary authority about the Rig Veda is Prof. Subhash Kak of the Lousiana State University.

For your information I believe that the Hindu texts are spirutually inspired but not divinely revealed.

Murad:

I would like to unconditionally apologize for raising the issue of your mentioning your wife`s religious affiliation. It was in bad taste and I`m sorry.

I wouild suggest, Murad, that the problem you want to address has nothing to do with history or mythology.

For example, you might eventually get every Hindu to accept that Rama was a mythological character. Nevertheless, the demand for the Ayodhya Babri/Ramajanmabhoomi site will not go away, because, historically, that site was consecrated ground for Hindus that was snatched away from them.

Likewise, pointing out that there may be Hindu analogs to Ghori, Ghaznavi and Aurangzeb is nevertheless not going to diminish the reality of what the above-named did.

So, mythology doesn`t really enter the picture, and history is what it is -- we can only try to hide it or destroy it, we have no time-machine to go back and correct it.

The real questions are : why should any of these incidents in the remote past have anything to do with the way we treat each other today ? What part of our collective and our separate heritages do we want do celebrate ? Are we agreed today in honoring the humanism and repudiating the nasty stuff that our heritages have ? Or, are we the children of Aurangzeb and Mihirkula, bent on pursuing the same goals or ideologies today ?

These questions do not go away regardless of how much ``debunking`` you attempt.

As to this agreement on the ``use of history``, why is it necessary, what does disagreement show ?

I, for example, find it extremely offensive, and indicative of the Roman Catholic Church`s modern attitude towards India, that while the Pope has gone around in this 2000th anniversary of the church making apologies and asking forgiveness for all the people the Church killed in Europe, the Pope has not found it necessary to make apologies for the Inquisition in India (the Inquistion was equally remote in time, and equally if not more bloody in outcome).

I read that as saying that the Pope feels that such methods are acceptable with Pagans, no apologies necessary. So the different views of history reveal a basic cultural conflict.

-arun gupta