It is a powerful term, perhaps the most significant in human evolution. It simply means that what was considered acceptable yesterday, may be derogatory today. The same applies to what we are doing today- incredible it will be if it is still palatable to the civilization a decade or a century later.
I learnt this term while reading Richards Dawkins’ The God Delusion. An example to begin with: The founders of America – George Washington and other great leaders while echoing thoughts of one man one vote and equality, kept slaves! Compare that to the modern Presidents of US, who champion human rights across the world. Many countries of Europe didn’t give the women right to vote until recently. What was acceptable then, now seems outrageous.
I recently read VS Naipaul’s A Wounded Civilization – a book written during emergency. The author elaborates about Gandhian values and how they did damage to India. He also writes about Gandhiji’s successor Vinoba Bhave, who led the famous Bhoodan movement, which was essentially a march across the nation, asking for land, which could be donated to the untouchables. Bhave was accompanied in the march by the wife of great Jamnalal Bajaj, Jankidevi, who preferred cooking for herself and did so because she couldn’t trust the cleanliness of the Untouchables. So much for asking land for people whom she couldn’t trust for cleanliness!
VS Naipaul further writes:
Vinoba Bhave once said, "Untouchables do what human beings don't do, so they must be given land." The message however Gandhian it seems, also means that latrine cleaners are latrine cleaners, untouchables are untouchables.
In a recent controversy a few years ago, filmmaker Sanjay Leela Bhansali's movie Padmavati depicted the story of a thirteenth-century Rajput queen, Padmavati, whose beauty captivated Sultan Alauddin Khilji of Delhi. Despite Padmavati's efforts to free her captured husband, Khilji ultimately defeated the Rajput armies, leading to Padmavati's self-immolation to protect her honor.
I neither know what lies in Bhansali’s movie, not the reported distortion of “historical facts”, if a term like that exists. But apparently, a section of fringe elements in Indiahas vowed dire repercussions for Bhansali and the leading actress, Deepika Padukone, who enacts Padmavati in the movie.
The protesters had the backing of the ruling right wing party, the BJP, whose leader has announced an enormous cash prize for hacking the nose of Deepika. I felt a vomiting sensation as I wrote that. But it reminded me from where this strong vindictive threat emerges.
When I was a child, I read the Ramayana, the most celebrated story in Hindu mythology. The story is about Lord Rama, one of the most recognizable Gods in India, and his travails across India, all the way to where the modern Sri Lanka lies. Lord Rama’s life is supposedly full of inspirational tales about relationships, morality and heroism. Hindus in India enact short plays to reiterate those tales every year.
One of these tales is about a lady who proposes Lord Rama for marriage. The Lord, pointing to his wife, politely refuses her proposal and asks her to try her luck with his brother, Laxman, knowing that he too is married. When Laxman too refuses, the woman, who is a demon, tries to attack Lord Rama’s wife, Sita. Laxman then hacks the nose and the ears of the woman.
Young readers of this story may perceive this retribution as justified. They are taught that Lord Rama and his brother are considered Gods, so anyone they harm must be a deserving sinner. However, it is not explained who granted Laxman the authority to mutilate a woman's nose and ears. Was it his brother, the God?
Comments