Indians love premature celebrations almost as much as they seem to like disappointment. Witness any cricket world cup in which India has been a contender — the victorious dances the moment a match begins and then the familiar, subdued return to reality when it is lost.
Right now, as the Indian elections progress toward their finale, there is a mood of celebration among the supporters of the right-wing Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). The market decided some time ago that India will soon have a BJP government and since then has stabilized — and is now on an upswing.
For those who are not looking forward to a BJP reign, it is a time for nervousness.
Those like me who have lived through a term of BJP government (1998 to 2004) know that Narendra Modi, the prime ministerial candidate — revered and reviled in almost equal measure — is only part of the problem. The larger issue is the BJP itself and its disciplinarian, quasi-militant, extreme right-wing outfit, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh.
The riots in Modi’s Gujarat that killed 2,000 Muslims took place while the BJP was in office. During that period then-Indian education minister Murli Manohar Joshi proposed that astrology should be studied at university. Both these were expressions of the party’s robust, masculine Hinduism. We cannot be certain what might be on the agenda with an entrenched BJP.
The endlessly repeated criticisms of Modi do not seem to have made the slightest difference, but an observation in the Times of India from a Muslim activist, Tanweer Alam, is worth noting for its directness.
“India is secular, not because Muslims want it to be, but because this country has evolved over millennia in [such] a way that religion and its practice have been left out of the domain of the state,” he wrote. “This is reflected in India’s constitution. It is relevant to note that Europe did not become secular to accommodate Jews, Muslims or Buddhists, but to protect people from sectarian strife within Christianity. US secularism has similar origins. India too is secular because of Hindus, not Muslims, Sikhs, Christians or Parsis.”
This is important, but if Hinduism, rather than what Indians call “secularism,” is to be the dominant paradigm for the near future, what does it mean for politics today? Given that it was never an organized religion, and even its name has a Persian rather than an Indian provenance, Hinduism is hard to pin down.
Its fluidity encompasses the caste system, mythology and austere philosophical positions, including atheism. Even texts associated with Brahminical Hinduism, such as the Bhagavad Gita, are really subtly anti-Brahminical given the influence on them of Buddhism.
It was also part of the immensely sophisticated cultural makeup of a certain kind of Hindu to treat the stories central to their beliefs as both sacred fact and metaphor. This was one of the characteristics of this faith that made it open up to secularism.
The BJP’s contribution to the reshaping of Hinduism has been twofold. First, by turning metaphorical moments such as the birth of Lord Rama into historic events to be fought over, it has made Hinduism a literal-minded, Europeanized, Semitic-style faith. By taking away from Hinduism its complexity and contradictoriness, both the BJP and the free-market “new India” in which it has flourished have produced a generation that knows little about Hinduism.
Second, the political, instrumental use of Hinduism to defend and assert identity, while assailing other identities, and a general ignorance of religious experience on the part of the most active religionists, means that not only do we live in an age when to be Hindu is to constantly take offense, but the line separating obeisance from offense, the holy from the disgusting, religious pride from poor taste, is blurred. Indians are being schooled to defend the sacred, but have absolutely no idea how to recognize it.
Let me provide an example. “Prophylactic Hindu tiles,” as I will call them, have been proliferating in India for two decades. You see them on walls, the sides of urinals and staircases. They have on them a Hindu god — Shiva, Parvati, Ganesh — painted in the European style that is a cliche of kitsch Hindu iconography.
Their function is to discourage urinating and spitting on public surfaces, both compulsive national masculine pastimes. The argument they embody — never actually inscribed in either ancient scripture or even a municipal text — is that no one would dare urinate or spit betel juice on a god.
I can think of no more tasteless use of the sacred, but the bizarre interpretation of religion in contemporary India means that hardly anybody thinks the tiles an outrage.
In its unintended strangeness it is both akin to and the very opposite of Marcel Duchamp’s “found object.”
Duchamp placed a urinal in an art gallery in 1917, named it Fountain and so turned it into an art object. He not only inaugurated the artistic avant garde, but also created an aesthetic and political scandal, provoking his audience to reimagine how and why things become culturally sanctioned.
The prophylactic tile, too, performs a political role, if “political” means the instrumental use of religion in the “new India.” Here, the sacred is not meant to cause wonder, but to impose order and obedience, and curb visceral urges.
So what of the astonishingly rich creative legacy of Hinduism in modernity?
Its demise is hardly remarked on. Among the last artistic products of that legacy were the nude Hindu goddesses painted by M.F. Hussain, for which he was hounded out of the country.
If modern Hindus wanted secularism primarily for themselves, it is worth noting that they also wanted their faith to be largely unprotected, a free and common cultural resource for everybody — atheist, Muslim, Christian, Buddhist, Sikh, Parsi and Hindu.
When Hussain, a Muslim, worked on those pictures, he believed we still lived in that world.
It has become clear in the past decade that we do not and pretty evident — even if the BJP loses — that we will not any time soon.
Amit Chaudhuri is a novelist and professor of contemporary literature at the University of East Anglia.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Ursula K. le Guin in The Ones Who Walked Away from Omelas proposed a thought experiment of a utopian city whose existence depended on one child held captive in a dungeon. When taken to extremes, Le Guin suggests, utilitarian logic violates some of our deepest moral intuitions. Even the greatest social goods — peace, harmony and prosperity — are not worth the sacrifice of an innocent person. Former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), since leaving office, has lived an odyssey that has brought him to lows like Le Guin’s dungeon. From late 2008 to 2015 he was imprisoned, much of this