*Rightwing-Rightwing Bhai Bhai  : Who fears Javed Akhtar ?*

*- subhash gatade*

A 'unity of purpose' has been witnessed between Hindu and Muslim
supremacists, who consider themselves the sole spokespersons of 'their
community'.
[
https://www.newsclick.in/rightwing-rightwing-bhai-bhai-who-fears-javed-akhtar
]

"The devout man considers me an infidel, and the infidel thinks, (I'm)
Muslim/

the non-believer thinks I'm saint, and the saint considers me non-believer/

After hearing both sides, I am amazed/

I'm that subject which is difficult to understand/

If someone is inclined to understand, then I am easy."

[https://www.editorji.com/entertainment-news/javed-akhtars-couplet-cause…
<https://www.editorji.com/entertainment-news/javed-akhtars-couplet-causes-stir-1756991792269>
]



There are rare occasions when literary academies associated with
governments wilt under mob pressure.

Rarer are occasions when they even cancel the very programme they had
organised with much fanfare.

It has been more than 10 days that West Bengal witnessed such a spectacle,
when the West Bengal Urdu Academy suddenly postponed a programme where it
intended to discuss 'Urdu in Indian Cinema' for four consecutive days. .
Javed Akhtar -- one of the foremost living Urdu poets -- was also invited
as a key speaker in the programme.

Two prominent Islamist organisations in Kolkata, Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind and
the Wahyahin Foundation, had protested the invitation, as they considered
Akhtar’s views on religion problematic, labelling him as someone who
"speaks against religion and God".

Akhtar is a declared atheist and openly talks about it on public fora, and
that had irked these people.

The organisations even threatened to launch a state wide agitation -- much
on the lines of their agitation against Bangladeshi author Taslima Nasreen
which as everyone knows had forced her to leave the state (2007) -- if the
government did not heed their demand.

Mamata Banerjee, the West Bengal Chief Minister, did not want to take any
risk as elections to the state Assembly are not too far.



*Outrage Unlimited?*

This sudden postponement/cancellation of the programme did create a sense
of outrage among writers, activists and personalities associated with
cultural arena. Concerned citizens condemned t
<https://www.telegraphindia.com/my-kolkata/events/aparna-sen-on-javed-akhtars-bengal-urdu-academy-invitation-snub-shame-on-them/cid/2121648#g>he
'shameful' act, and questioned the 'idiots' who run the Urdu Academy,
people “who do even not know the genesis of this language or who are keen
to conflate Urdu with Muslim identity.” This weaponisation of 'hurt
sentiments'
<https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/javed-akhtar-west-bengal-urdu-academy-mamata-banerjee-government-10230120/>
to
shape political choice also came under scanner of analysts.

No doubt, the discernible outcome of this whole spectacle is the way it
brought to the fore the voices of these self-proclaimed custodians of
religion and morality to the centrestage, exposed their myopic worldview
and demonstrated how they appear to be a mirror image of similar custodians
from the other side, who similarly target the likes of  comedians Kunal
Kamra or Munawar Faruqui to folk singer Neha Rathod or the academic
‘Medusa’ etc., as they consider their views and the courage and the
irreverence with which they carry it, objectionable.

No doubt this postponement/effective cancellation of Akhtar's Kolkata
programme, must have gladdened Hindutva Supremacists to no end.

For them, too, Akhtar is no friend of Hindutva and has time and again
criticised, condemned their efforts to usher India into Hindu Rashtra,
abandoning the glorious history of this secular republic



*Birds of Same Feather?*

Like the old idiom goes, ‘birds of the same feather flock together’, one
witnesses a similar tango of sorts among religious supremacists -- despite
their apparent opposition to one another -- on various occasions.

Such 'unity of purpose' is witnessed especially when the State moves draft
laws that refuse to give primacy to one's faith. All such steps that
essentially promote separation of religion from politics are anathema to
them. As they consider themselves to be the sole spokespersons of 'their
community', they are always in the forefront of raising objections.

Look at the debate around 'law against blasphemy
<https://www.newsclick.in/punjab-why-proposed-law-against-blasphemy-needs-be-discarded>
which
the Punjab government wants to introduce. As we know the proposed Punjab
Prevention of Offences against Holy Scriptures Bill, 2025 (PPOHS Act), was
recently referred by the state legislature to a committee for further
discussion.

We should not forget that it was in 2015 when a coalition government led by
Akali Dal and Bharatiya Janata Party dominated, with their worldview
associated with a particular religion. They had pioneered the move to make
a 'stringent law' against blasphemy.

Whereas experts on the Constitution or people/formations keen to uphold the
secular nature of our Constitution, have vehemently opposed such moves --
'like the blasphemy law
<https://sabrangindia.in/punjab-law-against-blasphemy-unconstitutional-open-invitation-to-oppressive-misuse-ccg/>',
neither the Hindutva Right nor the Muslim Right deemed it necessary to
protest this move.

All the secular critique of this law, like how instead of making the State
more distant from religion, it would “further consolidate the hold of
sectarianism, and strengthen the hands of religious extremists on all
sides”, appears music to their ears.

Similarly, misuse of the word
<https://www.newsclick.in/www.newsclick.in/punjab-why-proposed-law-against-blasphemy-needs-be-discarded>s
“against minorities and weaker sections, to harass them, exact revenge and
also to settle personal and professional quarrels, all matters entirely
unrelated to blasphemy” does not appear jarring to them.

Perhaps, we can as well recall the 2013 judgement of the Supreme Court --
which had essentially upturned a highly progressive judgement of the Delhi
High Court, then led by Justice A P Shah-- which had decriminalised
homosexuality and how during the interim period Rightwingers, conservatives
of  various shades -- from saffron to green -- had joined hands to oppose
this progressive judgement

Later, when the Supreme Court re-criminalised homosexuality, many a
self-proclaimed leaders of religion and purveyors of morality had felt
vindicated and even held a press conference proclaiming their support to
the decision of the Supreme Court on Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code,
as it was' [n]ot only in line with the eastern traditions of this country,
moral values and religious teachings but it also removes apprehensions
about invasion of Western culture and disintegration of the family system
and fabric of social life—the inevitable fallouts of the Delhi High Court
order of 2009 wherein it decriminalised homosexuality' .

The bonhomie exhibited by the holy men of different faiths was for everyone
to see.

One wonders whether they ever exhibited similar eagerness to come together
over any issue of real material concern for their own followers, or when
hatred poured out on the streets dividing people into 'us' versus 'them'
camps.



*Journey Down Memory Lane*

This episode reminds one of a period 80 years ago, when India was still
under the yoke of the British colonial government and there was talk of
enacting the Sharada Act, which prohibited marriages of girls under 14
years. Not very many people would know today that the initial impetus to
enact the Act had come from the revulsion felt by the articulate sections
over the death of Phulmoni, a child bride who had died after her marriage
to a man much older than her, was consummated. The 'pious' and the ‘holy of
both faiths', namely, Hindu and Muslim, had then come together to declare
that they would not allow this 'outrage on their deepest convictions and
their most cherished rights'.

It would be opportune here to recall Jawaharlal Nehru
<https://mainstreamweekly.net/article4725.html> writing on the subject that
had appeared in Modern Review (December 1935).

'*Some years ago I happened to be in Benaras... We saw Brahmins.. marching
shoulder to shoulder with bearded Moulavies.. and one of the standards they
carried in triumph bore the flaming device â  ˜Hindu-Muslim ekta ki jai
(Victory to Hindu-Muslim unity).. This was a joint protest by the orthodox
of both religions against the Sarada Act.*

He adds:

'*Offensive slogans were hurled at us and there was some jostling about.
Just then, the procession arrived at the Town Hall and, for some reason or
other, started stone throwing. A bright young person thereupon pulled some
crackers and this had an extraordinary effect on the serried ranks of the
orthodox. Evidently thinking that the police or the military had opened
fire, they dispersed and managed (this) with extraordinary rapidity. A few
crackers were enough to put the procession to flight…*

[ Quoted in Social and Religious Reform, Amiya P. Sen, OUP, page 118]

Nehru also notes the reluctance of the Western educated liberals to support
the venture and how they viewed the issue of social reform. In this
context, he quotes Sir Muhammad Iqbal, a leader of the solidarity of Islam,
who was in cordial agreement with the orthodox Hindus:

'*I very much appreciate the orthodox Hindus demand for protection against
social reformers in the new constitution. Indeed, this demand ought to have
been first made by the Muslims.*'(Ibid.)


[
https://www.newsclick.in/rightwing-rightwing-bhai-bhai-who-fears-javed-akhtar
]

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"humanrights movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/humanrights-movement/CAJGPqcYoEZ2Ka%2BiezxkAugcQwSSJmNFG6Y3VUnRKuN_%3DwLF0Ug%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to