Desicritics Author: Sandeep

Movie Review: Wall Street

Sandeep — Fri, 9 May 2008 15:18:11 EDT

The first time I watched Wall Street was when it was released in India. It bored me to death. Back then, my diet was crawling with action and horror flicks and plot-and-dialogue-heavy movies bored me. And now I'm in a frenzy of unearthing, watching and reviewing these selfsame movies.

Wall Street is simply a glossy, modern-day version of Crime and Punishment narrated rather well with the typical 1980s' Hollywood ingredients of high-tech gadgetry, skyscraper-culture, and some sleaze for good measure.

While it doesn't exactly qualify for a classic, it is a superlatively-told story worth watching a few times. High points of the movie include great performances by the protagonists, no-holds barred dialogue, and brilliant screenplay. The last attribute scores real well because it is difficult to sit through a dialogue-heavy film for over 2 hours unless the screenplay rivets you to your seat.

Wall Street is the familiar story of the seductive power of greed, and how its accompanying consequences play out in the minds and lives of different people. Set in the mid-1980s, Wall Street is about Gordon Gekko (Michael Douglas), an unscrupulous corporate raider who manipulates stock holdings of entire corporations using every proverbial dirty trick in the book, and Bud Fox (Charlie Sheen), a struggling two-pence stock salesman in a stockbroking firm. Gordon Gekko has everything that Bud Fox wants, and idol-worships him for that reason. Gekko takes him under his tutelage, and introduces him to his world. At some point, when Gekko feels that he has sufficiently peeled off Fox's conscience, he entrusts him with greater "responsibilities." To his credit, Fox, fuelled by his rapid successes, takes greater, and thus riskier initiatives. As is wont, his unethical journey brings him to his own, very ethical father's company. Gekko backstabs Fox. The rest is about retribution, soul-searching and salvation.

Oliver Stone is both a skillful storyteller and a great extractor of performances. Charlie Sheen takes us along all the way till the end starting with his almost-naive ambition to tearful guilt. But Wall Street is Michael Douglas all the way, which deservedly won him the Oscar. Oliver Stone gives his character a sense of completeness, which is missing in Sheen's characterization. The Gekko in Gordon Gekko seems to have a parallel in the Gecko lizard, which emits foul-smelllng material and feces to ward off its enemies. Gordon Gekko's "business" premise is slime. He hits hard, ducks, manipulates, and breaks every rule of decency to get what he wants and to stay there. He involves Bud Fox in every dirty deal but ensures that his own back is protected if trouble erupts. With this kind of absolute author-backed characterization, Michael Douglas has won you completely, much before he begins his celebrated Greed, for want of a better word, is good speech. Oliver Stone manages to retain the latent violence in Gekko's character till the close of the movie when he decides to unleash it. Gekko punches Bud Fox with a ferocity that only matches the inherent evil in his character.

Because there's no such thing as a perfect film, I guess we need to mention the most obvious shortcomings. Like most well-made movies, Wall Street seems to be in a hurry to finish. Bud Fox's decision to punish Gordon Gekko for ruining his father's company is contrived. The sequence and pace of his actions just don't make sense because till then you are given to believe that Gekko is this all-knowing monster. How Bud's artificial engineering of the stock market escapes Gekko's attention is puzzling. The biggest let-down is Daryl Hannah. From seducing the naive Bud Fox to graduating to his almost-love interest, her character has zero relevance to the movie. Wall Street wouldn't exactly suffer a loss if her character wasn't created at all. Also, Wall Street could have done without getting too preachy: whether its Michael Douglas preaching about the goodness of greed or Sheen's father sermonizing about the virtues of ethical living.

Wall Street wins not only for its superior storytelling or the other aspects I've mentioned but also because it portrays conflict so well.

Jugalbandi Concert: A Resonance That Didn't Resonate

Sandeep — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 01:38:17 EDT

I went, I listened, and left depressed. I am talking about this much-hyped concert that happened on Saturday.

Indian music icons Pandit Hari Prasad Chaurasia, M Balamurali Krishna and L Subramanian will come together to perform on a single platform on March eight in the city.

It was supposed to be the first-ever jugalbandi of its kind, a conglomeration of giants, a meeting of the icons... and it was just that: a meeting.

First off, I'm against any "timed" concert. By its very nature, Indian classical music concerts, until pretty recently, were not bound by time. While that no longer is real, concerts that still adhere to tradition have a marked difference in terms of quality of performance. You might disagree, but this is a point that merits a separate discussion.

The concert was titled Resonance, but what resonated right through was sadness, right from a certain Balakrishna Hegde's introductory speech, which seemed longer than the concert itself. He repeatedly got the artistes' name wrong, and focussed more on his organization's achievements than anything else. I personally felt jarred listening to the artistes indulge in mutual back-slapping more often than not right in the middle of the performance.

Clubbing L. Subramaniam with Balamuralikrishna and Hariprasad Chaurasia also assaulted my sensibilities. I had almost decided to skip the concert for just this one reason. Yet the allure of the other two masters convinced me otherwise.Hariprasad Chaurasia went first, greeting the audience with some naughty lines on gopikas, both of Krishna's time and the uncountable pretty dames in the audience. He opened the concert by welcoming the Chandrama, the moon with one of my favourites, Marwa, the distant cousin of the Carnatic Gamanashrama (Purvi Kalyani). It was characteristic of Chaurasia, and showcased his command over both the raga and the instrument. His incessant sojourn of Marwa across D r N G m instantly evoked blissful pathos. The dominance of Bhava (feeling, emotion) in Hindustani classical music is the main reason it is so close to my heart. From a master like Chaurasia wielding a bhava-heavy Marwa is like going on the journey to bliss. However, thanks to time constraints, he cut the journey short, leaving me fuming. Quality-wise, I've heard better from this artiste but I guess I needed to be better prepared to expect nothing beyond this from these khichdi kinda concerts.

Balamuralikrishna's piece was a self-composed rendition, Omkara Karini in Lavangi, a raga he has himself "created." At 77, he proved again that he is still the undisputed monarch of Carnatic classical music. His voice has lost none of its depth and sway. Methinks Balamurali is the only living musician who has shown that it is possible to infuse bhava in rendering Carnatic compositions on par with the Hindustani stream. In many ways, he deserves credit for rescuing Carnatic music from the stranglehold of tala, the likes of which once dominated concerts rendered mostly by the Madras Greats, without naming anybody here.Speaking of which, L. Subramaniam next shared the dias with his teenaged son, Ambi. Funny, the compere included Ambi when he read out the "list of living legends." The duo began an alapana of Gauri Manohari. I'm not sure which violin he used but it sounded jarring. Surprisingly, the aalpana was above average because my expectations from this artiste ranged from low to average. The composition (forgot the name now) was pretty ok but the kalpana swara prasthanams just went on and on and on, father and son taking turns. This is truly in the tradition of the Madras Greats who overdo the swara prasthanams till it turns into meaningless acrobatics in arithmetic. In a word: miserable. And yeah, I'm inherently biased against L. Subramaniam's music but that's a reason I'll explore another day. In a line, his stature and fame are grossly disproportionate to his abilities.

The real jugalbandi began next with Hamsadhwani, a raga common to both streams and a personal favourite. The Balamurali-Chaurasia combination worked amazingly well here. The two alternated, one picking up where the other left, and one expanding what the other just hinted at. Balamurali surprised everyone when he suddenly lapsed into a aa-nam-tat-tat-tanananam but tapered off as suddenly. I expected him to complete the ragam tanam pallavi...no such luck. Equally, he abandoned the aalapana midway and began Jayadeva's Vanamali. The concert closed with the mandatory display of the talents of the accompanists. Again, even this was an overkill.You cannot really blame the artistes: they have (unfortunately) mastered the art of playing to the kind of audience that attends these concerts. You organize a corporatish concert with well-decked ignoramuses making up 90% of the audience and you get a let-down performance. These selfsame artistes wouldn't dare perform this way in the concerts held in the sabhas and temples in the bylanes of Bangalore.

Now let me get back to Balamurali's Seetamma Mayamma or his fantastic ragam tanam pallavi in Revathi,Chaurasia's Keeravani and Malkauns are equally alluring...

Book Review: Exodus

Sandeep — Sun, 30 Dec 2007 15:11:12 EST

When it was first published, Exodus deservedly became an instant bestseller. In a brief period after its publication, it was translated into 50 languages. It remains an enduring, classic saga of the Jews, who as the book shows, "return home." That Leon Uris has poured passion into the book is apparent on every page.Exodus is almost an epic narrative of the history of Jews beginning somewhere in the late 1900s right up to 1948 when Israel was formally born. It is narrated through the spirit, deeds, and achievements of about five or six principal characters. It is touching and harsh, thrilling and depressing, gruesome and uplifting all at once. You cannot afford to be not shaken when you finish the book. Perhaps the Jews are the only race to undergo sustained indignities from every other race, in every country they migrated to, and emerged loftily victorious against centuries of insurmountable odds. The 500-plus pages of Exodus traces this journey to victory in painful detail.

The novel opens with an American journalist who lands in Cyprus in search of a long-lost friend. He discovers that the imperial British have placed thousands of refugee Jews behind barbed wires. These are "Hitler's refugees," the ones who survived his concentration camps. A passionate Jewish freedom fighter, Ari Ben Canaan is on a mission to rescue them and move them to Palestine against the British diktat of not allowing any more Jews into Palestine. That sets the tone for the rest of the book. Then Leon Uris slowly unrolls the canvas of both time and place through these refugee Jews. Karen, a German refugee, and Dov Landau the Polish Jew are the two other principal characters who accompany Ari on this journey. Ari is the son of a Russian Jew, Barak Ben Canaan who migrates on foot from Russia to Palestine. Through Karen's eyes, we get to read the now-familiar horrors of Hitler's Final Solution. Dov's tale unfolds the oppressive anti-Semitism that persisted for centuries in Poland climaxing again, with Hitler. Barak Ben Canaan opens the door on the Russian breed. The account of Barak and his brother, Akiva's journey by foot from Russia to Palestine is one of the most amazing sections of Exodus. Of the triumph of grit sustained by faith.

Every single chronicle has the same horrid strand: violent anti-Semitism and how the Jews' unshakeable faith as the faithful keepers of the laws of God kept them going....Simon Rabinsky was a believer among men. But even one so devout could not shut his eyes to the misery around.. him. "How long, O Lord...how long...must we live in this abysmal darkness?" And then his heart would grow light and he would become exalted as he repeated his favorite passage of the Passover Prayer--"Next year in Jerusalem."

Leon Uris casually throws the massive numbers of Jews killed in each land over several centuries: a few hundred thousand in Poland, a million in Russia, and Hitler's tally of more millions. What fascinated me was the strain of anti-Semitism in Poland. Despite declaring themselves as Poles first, the Polish Jews were betrayed by their fellow countrymen under German occupation. The author's sketches of Jewish ghetto life in Poland are very disturbing. Equally, their spirit of fighting the Germans "to the last man" are revealing.

Centuries of mindless anti-Semitism finally gave the Jews a new direction in late 19th century. The Dreyfus Affair really laid the seeds that gave birth to modern Israel. Herzl, who intimately covered the Dreyfus affair concluded that it was futile to counter anti-Semitism. He convened the first Zionist Congress. Herzl's efforts eventually culminated to the Balfour Declaration. An independent Jewish state would ensure to the Jews that Jew was no longer a term of abuse.However, the Balfour Declaration was really the beginning of prolonged British betrayal. Jewish cooperation in both world wars was rewarded with postponements and cloak-and-dagger games.

Imperial Britian wasn't willing to surrender her position in the Arab world. The British pitted the Arabs against the Jews and Arabs against themselves. Leon Uris documents the extent of British depravity when it pardoned known war criminals like the self-styled "Mufti," Haj Amin El Husseini. As late as 1945, the British still harboured illusions of its imperial grip despite staggering public opinion against its treatment of Jewish refugees. The British persist in this foolhardiness till the very end by voting against the Partition. As with its other colonies, the British has made a mess of the region when it left.

Without vocalizing it too much, the book correctly traces the roots of anti-Semitism to Christianity and specifically, the Crusades. He shows how the Arabs/Moslems held Jews in respect, or at the worst, tolerated them as second class citizens without killing them wholesale. This is unlike the indignity and brutality Jews suffered in Christian Europe.On the other side, Exodus shows what grit, determination, sacrifice and a spirit of unity can accomplish. Leon Uris describes in painstaking detail the prevailing conditions in Palestine and surrounding areas and how each wave of Jewish immigration--first in trickles, then in massive numbers after WW2--built a flourishing civilization in the most arduous geography. Uris brings this transformation alive. From hand-to-hand combat to full-fledged armed forces. In contrast, Uris shows how the Arab leaders use religion to keep their states in perpetual degradation. He portrays ordinary Arabs sympathetically, as prisoners of their own superstitions.

I don't want to dwell a lot on characterization and plot and other literary finery. For its own sake, the novel suffers from weak characterization but that's forgivable because the author operates in a constraint-bound atmosphere. There is little scope for characters to examine their thoughts and actions when a bomb is ready to fall any moment. It has huge gaps before the action moves forward. In fact, these pauses are more than a hundred pages. The description of the region's landscape is a little overwhelming and bores you after a point. You wouldn't miss anything if you skip ten pages in these sections. But you don't need to look at these aspects when you read Exodus.The choice of the title is significant. The original Exodus was the migration of Israelites from Egypt. The birth of Israel shows the migration of scattered Jews back into their holy land after two thousand years. The migration in itself pales in importance with its motive force: a tradition that was preserved for so long. When Barak Ben Canaan and his brother trek from Russia to Jerusalem, they seek out Jews in every village and town. Their faith in the faith of their fellowmen to tradition is intense and unerring. From the book,

In each village they asked, "Are there Jews here?" .... These Jews were different from any they had known. They were peasants filled with ignorance and superstition, yet they knew their Torah and kept the Sabbath and the Holy Days.

"Are there Jews here?"

"We are Jews."

"Let us see your Rabbi."

"Where are you boys going?"

"We are walking to the Promised Land."

It was the magic password....Never once were they refused hospitality.

When in 1948, the Promised Land finally declared statehood, Jews from all corners of the world poured into it. Yemen, Kurdistan, Turkey, France, Italy, (erstwhile)Yugoslavia, Czech, Rumania, Bulgaria, Britain, Greece, Algeria, Morocco, Egypt, Tunisia, South Africa, India, Canada, Argentina, Australia...

Exodus is without question a historical novel told from the obvious Jewish perspective. I cannot obviously cover everything in the space of a book review. I've purposely not dwelt on the evolution of the Israeli fighting forces, ideological differences (example, the Maccabees), and the important wars en route to freedom and after. My focus in this review was to showcase the extraordinary spirit of these amazing people. In an age when heroism is an obscenity, Exodus is mandatory reading. Some reviews hold the "Jewish perspective" against the novel to dub it "biased." It takes only a sick mind to detect a hidden agenda in a tale of Himalayan struggle because at the end of the novel, you feel elevated. I did.

Because Israel is the realization of Hope.

Malaysian Waters Are Suddenly Muddy

Sandeep — Fri, 30 Nov 2007 06:48:40 EST

The innocuous, almost ridiculous, demand for massive historical damages has smoldered into an international loss of face for Malaysia. Purely realpolitik terms, this was easily avoidable had the Malaysian government shown a little restraint. By jumping headlong in a fit of panic, Abdullah Badawi has invited both trouble at home and bad publicity outside. Within a week, Malaysia finds itself in muddy waters, which only promises to get worse.
A pragmatic solution to stop the protest from getting out of hand was to invite the protesters for a talk. More importantly, the protesters employed what is now fashionably called--Gandhigiri to vent their grievance.

A Tamachelvy, from Klang, told Malaysiakini that she, along with her 60-year-old father, attended this rally after hearing about the spate of Hindu temple demolitions.

“We felt very hurt after watching VCDs about how the government would destroy our temples. We are Malaysians but our government treats us like foreigners,” she said.

Instead of hearing them out, a democratically-elected Malaysian government swiftly resorted to violence without grave provocation. Badawi also threatened to invoke a tyrannical Internal Security Act, which

...allows for detention of any person the police deem to be a threat for up to 60 days. Detainees are denied access to legal counsel. Police can act on suspicion that an individual has acted or is about to act or is likely to act in any manner prejudicial to the security of Malaysia or any part thereof or to maintenance of essential services therein or to the economic life thereof." The law allows the Minister of Home Affairs to extend detention for up to two years without trial or submission of evidence. The detention order can be renewed indefinitely.

If the protest was allowed to pass on without violent state intervention, it would have caused a major embarrassment to Badawi at the most. Badawi could have remedied that embarrassment by a standard looking-into-the-grievance line. But his thoughtless move has resulted in severe damage to Malaysia’s image on at least two crucial fronts: as a favoured tourist destination, and in general, a peace-loving nation. A clue to understand Badawi’s response may lie in the highly-Islamized Malaysia, where Sharia courts wield equal--if not greater--power as the "regular" judiciary. The Malaysian government’s response makes sense in that light because Islamic political principles grant a dhimmi (or zimmi) status to non-Muslims. Accordingly, the origin or domicile status of a non-Muslim ceases to be of any consequence to the state. Dhimmis have absolutely no right, and any method to silence discontent is sanctioned. Does Badawi deem Malaysia an Islamic state governed only by the Sharia? Some political observers answer in the affirmative.

Malaysia’s Islamization over the past decade has arguably made matters worse and likely contributed to the hostility. Even though Muslim Malays just barely constitute a majority of the population, the government has proudly proclaimed Malaysia an Islamic state. It’s strictly political Islam...Islamization’s main effect isn’t to unite the country but to highlight differences, whether it’s with your Chinese neighbors or that Westerner ordering local fare.

That report is more than six months old, and provides great hindsight into what lurked beneath the awesome spectacle of Kuala Lampur.

The Malaysian government seems to be indifferent to the torrent of criticism that has emanated from all directions including the US. In what appears presumptuous, it has singled out protestors for arrest. Worldwide condemnation is a hopeful sign but we need to watch whether it fizzles out once the freshness of the atrocity fades.

From India, noises have reverberated from the expected quarters. Karunanidhi’s concern, although rooted in his party’s Tamil-first ideology is welcome. But the Indian government has so far refrained from taking any official position on the issue. Despite this, Nazri Aziz, a Malaysian minister has asked Karunanidhi to "lay off" the issue. Within India several agitating leaders who demanded Indian intervention were snubbed with

We are a very responsible democracy. We don’t discuss ... any other country in such a manner," Chatterjee said, according to the Press Trust of India news agency...

India cannot obviously sweep this under the carpet. A direct diplomatic offensive against Malaysia will send out wrong signals. Malaysian Indian protests were overwhelmingly if not hundred percent Hindus with specific Hindu grievances like state-sponsored temple destruction. An offensive will spark demands from other countries based purely on religious grounds: Buddhists in Burma, Sikhs in Canada and France, etc. This is not to argue against India’s support for Hindus outside India but against setting thoughtless precedents. Overt intervention in Malaysia’s internal crises will send wrong signals to other, similar "weaker" nations. This is an important lesson India needs to learn from America’s thoughtless interventions post World War II based solely on its prowess.

Malaysia has given plentiful reasons for India to feel offended. Malaysia has never made a secret of its hostility towards India. Its non-admission of Indians during the Surat plague is an open insult few of us remember (or care to). Its coziness with Pakistan is semi-secret. Shaukat Aziz has served it well by for example, lowering trade barriers so Malaysia could clamour for more from India at the ASEAN. That sounds like a harmless, routine international game compared to the dangerous nexus between A Q Khan and Badawi’s son.

The documents, obtained by AP via searches of publicly accessible files, reveal a paper trail through privately held and publicly listed companies that outlines ties between the prime minister’s son, Kamaluddin Abdullah, and the Sri Lankan, Buhary Syed Abu Tahir, as well as his Malaysian wife.
The documents show that the men were top executives at Kaspadu Sdn.Bhd. when Tahir negotiated a deal for a company linked to Kaspadu,Scomi Precision Engineering, to build components that Western intelligence agencies allege were for use in Libya’s nuclear program.
U.S. President George W. Bush last week called Tahir the "chief financial officer and money launderer" of the black market network led by Khan, who has admitted selling nuclear technology and know-how to Iran, North Korea and Libya.

The disgraceful Polaris incident is also worth recalling at this point. Just to add to India’s list of complaints against Malaysia. India desperately needs to (re)learn the art of displaying its displeasure to Malaysia. A good way to do this is to put a spanner in Malaysia’s economic prospects. By economically choking Malaysia, India has little to lose and a lot to gain. It will (finally, hopefully) send a clear message that India will not allow itself to be taken for granted. Given India’s current closeness with the US, a strong push in the right direction might convince the latter to change its mind about the FTA, which is currently "under review" for--among other things--"racial preferences." India might also need to "review" its agreement on the Multimedia Super Corridor, arguably, Malaysia’s most ambitious economic project...

Finally, international groups need to forcefully pick up the cause of Malaysian Indians and sustain pressure on Malaysia to clean up its act. India can "guide" them from behind the scenes when required. This technique has a high success rate, demonstrated by the fundamentalists who surround Bush. A diplomatic offensive on India’s part will only brand India as a troublemaker.

Is this too much to expect of our policymakers?

Are Indians Still Indentured in Malaysia

Sandeep — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 17:08:40 EST

The long-simmering discontent in the Indian community in Malaysia has erupted at last.

Earlier on Sunday, Malaysia’s Indian community had staged its biggest-ever anti-government protest and more than 10,000 protesters defied tear gas and water cannons to fight against racial discrimination in the country. The protesters brought Kuala Lumpur to standstill for almost six hours in the name of Queen Elizabeth II. They staged protest near Kuala Lumpur’s iconic Petronas Twin Towers and later clashed with police, which used their batons to beat protesters.

In the protestors’ own words, racial discrimination has translated into the Indian community remaining

"...backward, our schools are dilapidated. We are the last in the line for jobs, scholarships, health benefits," says opposition lawmaker Kulasegaran Murugesan, an ethnic Tamil.

Interestingly, the protest was not against the Malaysian government. Hindraf filed a class action suit against the British government claiming a gigantic $4 Trillion in damages. Hindraf traces the root of the sad plight of today’s Malaysian Hindus to the British colonial period. It is enough to discern the symbolism of Hindaf’s lawsuit without judging it as we shall briefly see. At the height of its colonial hegemony, the British shipped truckloads of (mostly Tamilian) indentured labourers to work in Malaysia’s abundant rubber plantations. Equally, as in almost all of its ex-colonies, the British created a mess when they left Malaysia in 1957.

In some kind of a cruel conspiracy of fate, Malaysian Indians continue to present a heart-rending sight. Slightly better than slaves, they had little choice under the British. Now, their own government actively discriminates against them. A key reason is the increase in Islamism. More than fifteen years ago, V.S. Naipaul called out this Islamic threat in his Among the Believers. Visible signs of this real threat have manifested in recent temple destructions, among other things. This is also an eerie pointer to how a completely Islamized Malaysia will look like in future. Another Afghanistan? Saudi Arabia, perhaps?

The Malaysian government’s response was as ruthless as it was predictable.

Police today used tear gas and water cannons to crush a banned rally by more than 10,000 ethnic minority Indians — a rare street clash that exposed Muslim Malaysia’s deep racial divisions....Witnesses saw people being beaten and dragged into trucks by the police. Shoes and broken flower pots littered the scene after protesters scattered to hide in hotels and shops.

Besides, the protest was not a direct attack against the government’s official policy of minority-discrimination. Hindraf’s lawsuit presents both an important symbol, and a lesson to all former colonies. Beyond its demand for monetary damages, it shows how colonialism still persists in the minds of the formerly-colonized. British colonialism is especially unique in the comprehensive civilizational damage it inflicted. Contrast that with the Jews who received not just repatriation, but ensured that the Holocaust remains etched in mankind’s memory forever. British colonization can surpass the Holocaust figure by several folds because it sustained its systemmatic, multi-cleaved attack over a prolonged period. This news report on the lawsuit shows us another disgusting facet of colonialism: condescension or, to put it politically-incorrectly: let’s-humour-the-natives. It classifies the report under Odd News.

For a thankful change, some in the Indian government seem to be displaying sense. Every Indian Votebank has its motive. Karunanidhi is concerned about the plight and/or safety of Tamils in Malaysia. As is a certain Vaiko, only he phrases it a little differently, he calls them Indians. A former election commissioner who is now a Rajya Sabha member also pitches in his bit.

Now, if this only translates into diplomatic sternness towards Malaysia...

Violence in Kolkata - The Battle For Bengal

Sandeep — Thu, 22 Nov 2007 05:54:58 EST

The Calcutta (not Kolkata) violence didn’t come as a surprise. Several foreboding omens of Muslim discontent had indicated what to expect. It was planned well, executed perfectly, and extracted the desired harvest.

The script unfolded in the lanes and bylanes of east and central Kolkata, where police were cramped for space. Fearing they would get trapped, the forces didn’t venture into the lanes.

The attacks, too, were planned in a manner that they could be countered only by opening fire. This was a risk police were not ready to take — especially after the high court’s strictures on the Rizwan case and Nandigram.

The Quivering Buddha quickly called in the Army to take charge. This sudden zeal to action was flagrantly absent during the recent Nandigram bloodbath unleashed by his own party’s goons. Buddha could ill-afford to let his goons retaliate now because the Muslims openly rioted as a specific religious group under the aegis of the All India Minority Forum (AIMF).

The slaughtered Muslims (also the refugees) in Nandigram provided another pretext to these organizations to renew what they are historically adept at: hollering that minorities are in danger. Nandigram was the excuse the AIMF and others gave for starting the riots. A long-forgotten Taslima Nasrin suddenly, mysteriously resurfaced on their radar.

Earlier in the day, activists of the All India Minority Forum protesting the violence in Nandigram and Bangladeshi author Taslima Nasreen’s visa extension on Wednesday indulged in brickbatting, blocked roads and clashed with police.

The Left in West Bengal is deservedly reaping the bitter rewards of indulging the Mullahs. The Jamiat Ulema has already thundered.

"We want the Centre to invoke Article 356 in West Bengal. We also want Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee to go. He is an arrogant and stubborn leader. Let a sincere leader come as the chief minister. Please remove him. The United Progressive Alliance government should take action to send message to the poor people that they care," says Maulana Mahmood Madani, All India general secretary, Jamiat-ul-Ulema-e-Hind.

The most stinging slap comes later, the ultimate insult to Indian secularism, as is.

...Buddhadeb has made a Gujarat out of West Bengal. I do agree with the view. Some murderers regret the crime and some feel proud of what they have done. Buddhadeb and Narendra Modi are proud of what they have done. Buddhadeb is saying that the killings are a fitting reply to whatever happened in the last 11 months. Buddhadeb and Modi both have no regrets for violence and that makes them similar to each other.

He is right in many ways. Madani has--perhaps unwittingly--awakened to the fact that the Indian Left has always politically manipulated the Muslims. The most illustrative instance of this points to the evidence-gathering phase of the Ayodhya debate. The Left, which had promised the moon to the Muslims scampered when their "evidence" amounted to naught.

The current violence in Calcutta has historical precedents mostly in intent and method. An oft-recurring feature of the freedom struggle was the threat of unprovoked violence issued by Muslim organizations of this nature to ensure that their demands were met. Till date, the appeasement-precedent that Mahatma Gandhi set continues almost unaltered.

Hardly any condemnation emanates from the mainstream media, liberals, intellectuals, or keepers of the society’s communal conscience. No outraged editorials against the AIMF or allied organizations. Eminent bloggers who relish taking regular potshots at the BJP, and condemn the wholesale selling of hate are not bothered to even alert us to this shameful incident. I guess their energies are solely reserved for overactive activism on the Gujarat riots.

It is bad enough that this has happened but it infinitely sad that it happened in West Bengal. In a perverse twist of fate, the land that gave India an entire galaxy of freedom fighters, thinkers, philosophers and poets is today steeped in comprehensive depravity. In less than a hundred years, the extent of West Bengal’s turpitude makes us wonder if Bankim, Vivekananda, Aurobindo, Tagore, et al were real men.

Ananda Coomaraswamy on Indian Education

Sandeep — Sat, 10 Nov 2007 10:50:55 EST

Introduction

Ananda Coomaraswamy was featured in this blog earlier. He remains one of the most staunch defenders of the Indian tradition in the mould of what David Frawley calls an Intellectual Kshatriya.

Coomaraswamy wrote a series of articles about the state of (the British-imposed) Indian education and alerted Indians about its perils. Because he mostly wrote for a scholarly audience, he didn't quite use the forthright language that Swami Vivekananda did:

The child is taken to school, and the first thing he learns is that his

father is a fool, the second thing that his grandfather is a lunatic, the third thing that all his teachers are hypocrites, the fourth, that all the sacred books are lies !... We have learnt only weakness.

Coomaraswamy enunciated the nuances behind what the Swami expounded to an ostensibly lay audience. One of the most celebrated quotes of Coomaraswamy on the disasters of English education follows:

A single generation of English education suffices to break the threads of tradition and to create a nondescript and superficial being deprived of all roots—a sort of intellectual pariah who does not belong to the East or the West, the past or the future. The greatest danger for India is the loss of her spiritual integrity. Of all Indian problems the educational is the most difficult and most tragic.

His essay, Education in India is a reader's treat in the range of problems it examines, equally the solutions it suggests. Read together with Memory in Education, it shows what was and what is possible.

Coomaraswamy opens the first essay with his characteristic candour in condemning the more evil facets of British imperialism.

...[One of] the greatest injuries done to the people of India have taken the outward form of blessings.

The perception that British education somehow "liberated" India persists till date. Manmohan Singh not long ago stated something to the effect as do several English-educated middle class Indians. Coomaraswamy demolished the myth in 1909 when he wrote this piece. In his time, he noted that an average English-educated Indian was unable to appreciate, nay, understand his own culture.

The most crushing indictment of this Education is .. that it destroys ...all capacity for the appreciation of Indian culture. Speak to the ordinary graduate ... on the ideals of the Mahabharata--he will hasten to display his knowledge of Shakespeare; talk to him of religious philosophy--you find that he is an atheist of the crude type common in Europe a generation ago...not only has he no religion but he is as lacking in philosophy as the average Englishman...talk to him of Indian art--it is news to him that such a thing exists; ask him to translate ... a letter written in his own mother tongue--he does not know it. He is indeed a stranger in his own land.

The last line is in itself a crushing indictment of our collective cultural amnesia. Coomaraswamy reserves strong words for Lord Maculay, the man who started this process of cultural colonization [Related Reading: JK's superb series on Lord Macualay]. Addressing the British educators in a tone of undisguised sarcasm, he asks them why they're unable to recognize the Indian babu, "made in [their] own image" by their

...most pompous and self-important philistine, Lord Maculay, [who believed that] a single shelf of a good European library was worth all the literature of India, Arabia, and Persia.

And sounds an baleful prophecy to

Beware lest in a hundred years the judgement be reversed.

In small and numerous ways, Coomarswamy's prediction is slowly ringing true. There's renewed interest to study ancient India with a zeal like never before. The "New Age (sic)" racket is just ancient India crudely, intelligently, attractively, and in some cases, falsely packaged.

British Education Policy Examined

Coomaraswamy's condemnation of British education stemmed from several sources. His main concern was that English education replaced something valuable with something worthless. It put the student in a paradox: on the one hand the student was cut off from his roots and on the other, he would never be able to fully acquire the culture and/or viewpoint of the imperialist.

...in actual fact, it is not the English point of view [that is acquired] but a caricature of it.

He quotes Abbe Dubois on the subject:

To make a new race of the Hindus, one would have to begin by undermining the very foundations of their civilization, religion, and polity, and by turning them into atheists and barbarians.

And this belief that Indians needed to be educated stemmed from the assumption that India was a savage country, "which it is England's divine mission to civilize." It is reasonable to conclude that Macaulay operated from this (racist) mode.

When Macualay's infamous Minutes were first put into action, they faced tremendous difficulties as Coomaraswamy points out. Sir Thomas Munro wrote that "if civilization were to be made an article of commerce between two countries, England would soon be heavily in debt." Prof. Nelson Fraser "shows how little the English teacher can know of the real life of [Indians]..." and

The Englishman is the last person to put forward any view as to possible reforms in Hindu institutions.

Coomaraswamy also narrates how the English educators who arrived in India to teach were completely lost. In their sincere attempts to know more about Indians, they find that the more "[the teacher] understood, the less would he wish to interfere, for he would either be Indianised at heart , or would have long realized the hopeless divergence" between English and Indian ideals. Coomaraswamy says that the idea of education should be separated from the "notion of altering the structure of Indian society." Any alteration or change or in his words, "true reforms come only from within and slowly."

The British however, did not heed any of these problems reported from "the field." They devised the education system such that Indian ideals, philosophy, arts, and languages were crushed without bloodshed. One way to do that was by bringing education under government control. Ananda Coomaraswamy writes that few indigenous institutions that imparted education in Sanskrit and Arabic "carry on a forlorn struggle for existence." India had a rich tradition of education built on the gurukula system or pathashala system sponsored by--so to say--the society with little or no adverse government interference. By "governmentalizing" education, the British cut off a long and unbroken tradition almost overnight. Any autonomous institution would die an eventual death.

A few modern institutions such as the Central Hindu College in Benares and the Hardwar Gurukula are carried on entirely without Government aid; but .. are bound to the University curriculum as otherwise their students would be unable to obtain degrees....The net result is that Indian culture practically ignored in modern education...

The British attack on Indian education also had the Missionary dimension. Coomaraswamy writes that Missionary education avowedly

...practises intolerance--by endeavouring to destroy that culture, in schools where education is offered as a bribe and where the religion of the people is of set purpose determined.

This practice continues even today where some Christian schools forbid female students to wear bindi, a sacred symbol of Hindus.

Some Solutions

Ananda Coomaraswamy repeatedly stresses on the ideal of education than a mere system of education. As an idea, education should "draw out or set free the characteristic qualities of the taught."

In Memory in Education, he says that culture, "in the East has been only secondarily connected with books and learning; it has been a part of life itself." From this, it wouldn't be incorrect to say that culture is the agglomeration of the education of several centuries. That is, any national culture is shaped by the education it receives.

He emphasizes that the "distinction between wisdom and knowledge must never be forgotten," which reminds us of T.S. Eliot. Wisdom, according to Coomaraswamy is therefore the "true end of education." He quotes Knox speaking about the culture of the people of Ceylon.

Ordinary Plowmen .. do speak elegantly, and are full of compliment.. there is no difference between the ability and speech of a Countryman and a Courtier.

Coomaraswamy quotes a Sinhalese proverb,

Take a ploughman from the plough and wash off his dirt and he is fit to rule a kingdom.

And attributes this astonishing feature to the existence of a national culture not dependent on a knowledge of reading and writing. He laments throughout these essays that this treasure has been lost almost forever thanks to English education. The most visible wound of this is that we have to read our own literature in a foreign language. That the glut of Mahabharatas written today by Indian authors is in English is an admirable effort. Yet almost none of these authors have read the original in Sanskrit--or in their vernacular tongue--because they don't know the language.

Coomaraswamy offers a seven-point remedy to overcome this. I quote most of them verbatim (in italics).

A universal philosophical attitude, "contrasting strongly with that of the ordinary Englishman who hates philosophy."

The sacredness of all things--the antithesis of the European division of life into sacred and profane... In India...religion idealises and spiritualizes life itself rather than excludes it.

The true spirit of religious toleration, illustrated continually in Indian history...

Etiquette--civilization conceived of as the production of civil men. In other words, education should enable a civilization where life should bring forth culture, not books.

The renewal of the special relationship between teacher and pupil and a return to the epics, classics, and great literature. ...the epics as embodying ideals of character, learning [as] a privilege demanding qualifications, not to be forced on the unwilling...extreme importance of the teacher's personality. Coomaraswamy frowns upon the modern practice of "making everything easy for the pupil."

The basis of ethics should spring from altruism and not from--religious or other--commandments. This follows from the "recognition of the unity of all life."

Development of personal character and conduct. As educational aids, Coomaraswamy lists them as control of thought, speech and action, concentration, one-pointedness and a "capacity for stillness."

His essay laments the loss of these ideals, which existed for centuries despite Islamic invasions. However, it was only the British axe that dealt it the death blow.

Coomaraswamy's criticism might seem severe but he is not blind to some of the advantages the English education brought for India. Even here, he says, these benefits tilt the balance in favour of preserving Indian culture. To close this post in his words:

...Western knowledge is necessary for India, but it must form for her....a post-graduate course.

Why Do Gorgeous Girls Marry Messed up Guys?

Sandeep — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 11:50:24 EDT

With this post, I run the risk of gross generalization but what the hell! The stuff I've written here is purely from personal observation and experiences. Ignore the ones that don't apply to you.

I've evolved a dictum of sorts from these said experiences: Gorgeous girls invariably marry fucked up guys and lead ruinous lives.

A few weeks ago, a long-lost friend called me and wanted to meet. Almost all guys back in college had wooed her to no avail. Post-college, she married a certified jerk. What transpired in our meeting was a series of sorry tales of multitudinous abuse. I didn't flatter myself to be an agony uncle. She wanted to catch up to remember the fun times. She also narrated similar sordid tales of mutual (girl) friends.

I got out of that meeting badly shaken.

I tried to recollect how the other girls - OK, friends who are girls - I knew were doing now. I tried to reestablish contacts, a painful but rewarding experience. A common theme emerged from my limited success at this endeavor. All the pretty ones were miserably taken. And they had married the ones whom everybody had warned
about. As an aside, I didn't have zillions of girls as friends, the number is less than ten. I am exaggerating, just to make it more grim. To make it look like it's some kind of phenomenon. It is.

So, is it universal or just restricted to my insignificant circle of people? It seems like it is universal. Look at movies or fashion or to an extent, performing arts. Meena Kumari, Zeenat Amman, Parveen Babi, Srividya, Nafisa Joseph, and the most tragic of all of them, Marilyn Monroe.

What gives? Why do pretty babes marry/live with assholes? What explains their dumbfounding ability to tolerate almost any kind of abuse? Is that an attempt to "show the world how wrong it was about the asshole in question?" Some kind of hidden masochistic propensity? Their way of "punishing" themselves for making the wrong choice? Some innate weakness that limits them from getting out of such fatal relationships? The kids? Ego?

The more fundamental question perhaps lies in trying to understand why they're attracted to jerks in the first place? That is the seed they willingly sow for the adversity that awaits them.

Whatever fancy, psychological mumbo-jumbo, or even commonsense answers these questions may yield, the fact remains that they are with jerks. What is more ironic is that these women have also seen other women who've let themselves get trapped. The answers are as ready as they are foolish. She chose badly. I'd leave him the day she shouts at me/slaps me/insults me/abuses me. What they are really saying is: it'll never happen to me.

I need to read Madame Bovary again.

Rama in Tamil Tradition

Sandeep — Wed, 17 Oct 2007 00:38:22 EDT

This is post is partly a response to several comments I received on my posts related to the Ram Sethu project. The greater part, however, is an attempt to trace the Rama (and Ramayana) consciousness in Tamil Nadu.

The Sangam corpus is typically used as a reliable source for a lot of historical information about Tamil Nadu. Its historicity spans 200 BCE to 200 CE. It is therefore reasonable to start tracing the Rama tradition in Tamil Nadu from this source. In general, the Sangam Literature contains numerous references to Lord Vishnu (for example, in Paripaatal) and his prominent avatars like Narasimha, Rama, and Krishna. Purananuru, a collection of about 400 poems contains a reference to Ramayana.

Post-Sangam, the Alvars were the true pioneers of the Vaishnava bhakti movement. In a way they were the spiritual progenitors of Ramanuja, founder of Sri Vaishnavism, who held them in reverential esteem. The term Alvar means one who is immersed. Between the twelve of them, they composed what is known as the Natayira Divyaprabandham (4,000 Divine Veses) dedicated to all forms of Lord Vishnu. References to Rama are abundant in the Alvar literature, most notably in the poetry of Kulashekara Alvar, who dedicated his life to worshiping Rama. Most notable is that in an age where the caste system had reached deplorable levels, Thiruppan, an untouchable was elevated to an Alwar by the sheer force of his devotion.

Kambar's Ramavatharam -- popularly, Kambaramayanam -- is the next definitive epoch-making work that helped spread the Rama tradition throughout the Tamil land. Inspired by Valmiki, Kambar retold the epic in about 10,000 verses. This work contributed not just to classical Tamil literature but over time, became inseparable from routine Hindu religious worship. To date, the entire Ramavatharam is recited in the Aadi month of the Tamil calendar. It is also part of regular worship, chanted alongside Sanskrit mantras.

In general, the Sri Vaishnava movement holds Rama in special reverence. It spread its wings really wide to spread the message of Rama in Tamil Nadu and beyond. A key defining concept of Sri Vaishnavism is Sharanagati or complete surrender. This in turn has its roots in Vibhishana's surrender to Rama. From Nathamuni to Yaamunacharya to Ramanuja, every major Sri Vaishnava saint and philosopher composed an array of elaborate literature on Rama and helped build Rama/Vishnu temples across Tamil Nadu.

The next saint-philosopher to greatly propagate the Rama movement was Sadashiva Brahmendra or Upanishad Brahmendra, who lived in Tiruchinapalli in the 18th century. He initiated the concept of Rama Parabrahma or Rama as Brahman. The most famous celebrity-follower of Brahmendra was Thyagaraja whose entire life centered around Rama. The Tanjore-Cauvery belt in Tamil Nadu came under the Rama-bhakti spell owing to these influences.

Other stalwarts of the Rama bhakti movement include the legendary Vedanta Desikar - who wrote a thousand verses on Sri Rama's Paaduka (sandals/footwear) - Sridhar Sastry Aiyyaval, C.Rajagopalachari, whose Chakravarthi Thirumagan is an acknowledged modern classic, the Kanchi Paramacharya, and Ahobila Jeeyar.

The Rama bhakti movement also showed manifestations in several areas such as art, music, dance, drama, and folk. To this day, art forms such as Oothakadu, Sulamangalam, Terukoothu, and Bhagavata Melas focusing on the Ramayana theme are performed in various parts of Tamil Nadu. These have an unbroken existence of about a thousand years. Gopalakrishna Bharati's Nandanar Charitram, popular even today, is based on Arunachala Kavi's Rama Natakam. Nandanar Charitram has been adapted, revised, and customized several times over by eminent artists like Thanjavur Krishna Bhagavatar, and more recently, Balasaraswathi.

The fact that one of the holiest Hindu pilgrimage spots, Rameshwaram, is in Tamil Nadu speaks volumes. No less than Rama had himself installed two lingas, which are housed in the magnificent Ramanatha Swami temple.

The Rama tradition also finds its expression in the names people give their children. Raman, Rameshwaran, Ramaswamy, Ramabhadran, Sitaraman, Sivaraman, Sivaramakrishnan, Ramasubramanian, et al . That more than anything, testifies to the continuing significance and Rama-consciousness in Tamil Nadu. This, despite state-sponsored denigration of everything Hindu and rampant conversion activities.

Two Flawed Views of Hinduism

Sandeep — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 07:06:04 EDT

A question that repeatedly seems to haunt the Indian mainstream media: how to "balance" Hinduism with Semitic religions? This question assumes importance in issues where the religious aspect assumes great significance. So Sethusamudram is the latest issue, which has been haunting the media for several weeks now. And so, Vir Sanghvi writes about the "two views of Hinduism," his attempt to keep mythology from getting in the way of economic development. He elaborately tries to define Hinduism, and concludes that the anti-Sethu advocates are tarnishing Hinduism’s fair name.

Unfortunately, the article shows a poor understanding of Hinduism, and a shocking lack of the issues surrounding the Sethu project.

Very early in the article, Vir deplores the fact that even secularists/liberals have taken what he calls "a pro-religion/anti-history" line. Apart from the most vocal Hindu groups like the VHP and RSS, no secularist or liberal has ever focussed on the religious aspect of this controversy. Sanghvi’s anti-history remark also smacks of ignorance: sufficient research has not been done to conclusively prove whether Ram Sethu is a natural formation. Sanghvi reveals his bias when he accuses that

..the Sangh Parivar will pick on this issue to fan more Ram Mandir-type hysteria.

Sanghvi’s genuine concern for policy being held hostage to religion is laudable but does it mean that this should be at the cost of destroying a crucial aspect of the nation’s heritage?

He turns his focus to how Hinduism evolved and repeats the discredited Aryan Invasion/Migration Theory.

There is evidence that the Indus Valley Civilisation venerated a god who was very like Shiva in his Pashupati avatar. There are also many similarities between the gods of early Hinduism and the gods of Greek and Roman mythology. Perhaps, this is because the religion evolved before migrations at some place where Aryan-type people lived.

It is unclear what "migrations" he refers to. One would expect this much from an article that traces Hinduism’s evolution from an archaeological perspective, too. Sanghvi blunders further when he says that there is "no constant" in Hinduism. To prove this, he uses Hindu gods and the Ramayana and Mahabharata as examples. We shall examine each of these at some length.

In the early texts, Indra, a god we never hear of today, played a major role.

If we take Vedanta as the earliest Hindu philosophical texts, it very clear that they talk of Brahman or the Ultimate Reality, which is a formless, changeless, nameless, and transcendent reality that can be realized only through experience. Indra is an important part of any Vedic ritual even today. As the God of Rain, it is logical that Indra occupied a preeminent place in the largely-pastoral Vedic society.

Vir Sanghvi says that Ramayana and Mahabharata were

...put together over centuries and the story evolved over time. For instance, the Valmiki Ramayana and the Tulsi Ramayana are not exactly the same.

This is wholly incorrect. The introductory verses in the Ramayana clearly indicate the unity of the epic as a single narrative. Besides, those familiar with Sanskrit poetry can easily discern the difference in style if an interpolation has occurred. It is beyond doubt that Ramayana and Mahabharata have numerous interpolations but the original epic remains intact. In his On the Meaning of the Mahabharata, V.S. Sukhtankar, an authority on the epic, has refuted precisely this claim--that the epic evolved over time. It is also shocking how Vir Sanghvi states this without as much as hinting that there’s a concept of "primary sources." Valmiki’s Ramayana is the primary source and Tulsidas’ work is an embellishment of Valmiki’s epic. As a broad analogy, Sanghvi’s seems to say that there are as many moons in this world as there are countries. In addition, by failing to name at least one scholar, Sanghvi fails to backup certain serious, scholarly conclusions he makes:

...but most scholars agree that the Gita was added to the Mahabharata many centuries after the epic was first written...some scholars claim that Ram’s Lanka was not today’s Sri Lanka...

Vir Sanghvi’s approach smacks of a dismissive attitude towards Hindu epics. Proceeding on similar lines, he treads interesting but familiar territories.

The point of Hinduism lies in the message, not in the historicity.

Interpreted another way, this also implies a denial of historicity to Hinduism. Religions, beliefs, and more importantly, values, do not exist in a vacuum bereft of time and space. The message of Hinduism certainly has a rich, varied, and traceable history behind it. We can reasonably trace the history of each of the six darshanas (philosophical schools) of Hinduism. Sanghvi speaks about this in the context of "historical" religions like Islam and Christianity. From this perspective, can we reasonably conclude that those religions are only valuable historically but are really pointless in the message they deliver? Vir actually argues that Islam and Christianity are "out of scope" of argument but Hindu Gods, heroes and saints can be dissected at will.

The point of Hinduism is that the stories emerged out of the shared experience of the millennia. And that we are free to draw our own conclusions. In contrast, there is very little scope to argue that Jesus got things badly wrong or that the Prophet acted immorally.

Islam’s books have enough material to show that its Prophet was a little more than a pedophile but that fact according to Sanghvi is beyond scrutiny. This train of thought is familiar in Indian secular discourse, which imposes a self-ban on critically examining Abrahamic religions.

Sanghvi uses this rather elaborate examination of Hinduism to prove that even educated Indians supported the suspension of the two ASI officials, and consequently, allowed development to be held hostage by religion. This goes against commonsense and widespread public perception that the suspended ASI officials were mere scapegoats to protect the powerful.

And yet, even those of us who will accept all this at an intellectual level, will support the suspension of the hapless ASI employees and argue that to go ahead with the Sethusamudram is to hurt the sentiments of Hindus.

I had written earlier that till the UPA scored a self-goal by filing the affidavit, most ordinary Hindus had never heard of Ram Sethu. Vir Sanghvi’s deliberate attempt to obfuscate the real opposition to the Sethu project also holds good in this light. The larger aspect involved here is more than hurt sentiments; it concerns preserving India’s cultural heritage, of which the Ramayana--and consequently, Rama--stands in the forefront. As this post perceptively observes, the ASI actually went against its very raison d’être and bent to accommodate political whims.

[ASI’s] goal is to conduct archaeological research and protect India’s cultural heritage. This caused an arc of outrage and a political crisis. To control the political damage, the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government withdrew the affidavit and suspended the concerned ASI officials. This makes sense, not so much for shielding the Minister for Culture, but for making unwarranted statements about the historicity of Rama.

Vir Sanghvi further complicates the issue by delving into the details of the affidavit.

In its limited way, the ASI’s affidavit is accurate. Similarly, the scientific evidence is conclusive. Ram Setu is not a man-made (or monkey-made) formation. It was created millions of years ago, before there were humans in the Indian peninsula.

Scientists have not stated anything conclusive so far on Ram Sethu so far but it is incomprehensible how Sanghvi reached this conclusion. On the contrary, scientists and other experts oppose the project on the grounds of economic non-viability, ecological concerns, and national security. A recent update tells us that in January 2005, the Prime Minister himself had raised 15 objections, which the Sethu project authorities failed to clarify convincingly.

Also, Sanghvi mixes issues when he contends that it is only the Hindu groups that are obstructing policy-making by making "politically-expedient interpretations of Hindu legends." In the same breath, he urges us to consider scientific evidence where no definitive conclusion has been reached yet! As this article (free PDF download) observes,

Mythologized histories are not easy to study unlike straightforward histories. This does not mean that they cannot be studied with a view to extract historical information. Instead, without any historical, archaeological, and philological study of Ramayana, the ASI has concluded that Rama was not a historical figure. For an organisation that claims to be scientific, the ASI has failed to research and examine data, come up with facts and the make a judgement.

The "Other" View of Hinduism

Vir Sanghvi then examines the "other" view of Hinduism. He assigns different labels to it: "historical," "semitic" and "literal."

There is a second view of Hinduism and it came to the fore during the Ayodhya agitation. In this view, historicity is everything. All of Hindu legend must be taken literally. There must have been a historical Ram because otherwise the basis of our religion is a lie. If there was a historical Ram, then he must have had a birthplace — and so, the Ram Janmabhoomi movement is central to our belief.

There is nothing in the whole corpus of Hindu literature and scholarly works that can remotely testify this view. The Ayodhya agitation wasn’t whether Ram was real or not. Admittedly, thousands of mostly-illiterate Hindus believe that the Ramayana actually happened the way it is described by Valmiki. However, the Ayodhya movement was to preserve--like the Sethu agitation--a cultural heritage. Besides, Rama is not the basis of Hinduism. As I said earlier, the foundation of Hindu thought lies in the concept of Brahman. A brief survey of Rama-related literature tells us that Rama is repeatedly worshipped as Brahman. Vaishnava literature repeatedly eulogizes him as Sri Rama Parabrahma (a noted mantra is Om Sri Rama Parabrahmane Namah). This applies equally to almost all Gods and Goddesses in the Hindu pantheon.

Sanghvi also calls the "second view" as "literal" Hinduism, a strange beast. This beast, according to Sanghvi, didn’t exist until L.K Advani defined it.

For me, the defining argument of the Literal Hinduism position is the one that LK Advani offered in defence of the Ram Janmabhoomi movement.It did not matter, he said, whether this was really the birthplace of Ram. He was not obliged to provide any evidence to substantiate this claim. What mattered was that Hindus believed that this was where Ram was born. And that was more than enough for him.

According to this argument, Vir Sanghvi is content to accept as the final verdict (on Hinduism, no less), the statement of just one man! This approach is consistent with his earlier statement that Prophetic deeds were beyond scrutiny. He extends this argument to make a rather ridiculous claim that Rama Janmabhoomi didn’t exist till the VHP invented it!

In fact, it was never clear that Hindus believed this. Most people had never heard of Ram Janmabhoomi till the VHP made it an issue. And there are several other sites in that area that also claim to be the birthplace of Ram.

The first thing that any child learns about the Ramayana is that Rama was born in Ayodhya. It is beyond the scope of this entry to examine the mountainous evidence that the pro-Ram Janmabhoomi groups presented before the government. What is interesting that Vir Sanghvi does not present an iota of proof to substantiate this assertion, which borders on fraud.

Sanghvi prides himself on being a liberal. One of the characteristics of a liberal is being open-minded and unafraid to criticize irrationality. Unfortunately, Sanghvi’s liberalism is restricted to criticising a truly liberal religion without taking the effort to understand its fundamentals.