Some British (pseudo) Hindu intellectuals and Mr.
Meghnad Desai, House of Lords have together launched a campaign to reinstate
M.F. Hussain's solo exhibition in London, withdrawn some days ago due
to strong objection by Hindu Organizations, Hindu Human Rights and Hindu
Forum of Britain. They have made some allegations against the Hindu
organizations and tried to justify their campaign.The allegations are
as are as follows.
1. A key reason the exhibition is being attacked is because M.F. Hussain is a Muslim.
2. Hindu Rights groups have attempted to undermine the artistic freedom.
3. Hindu goddesses can be seen in a variety of poses which many may find erotic in the temples of Khajuraho and Tirupati (?) and many others. - Meghnad Desai, House of Lords
"It is because he is
a Muslim and hence the desire of some Hindu groups to deny his artistic
freedom to take Hindu gods and goddesses as his theme."
Fact: Hindu Janajagruti Samiti has handled many similar campaigns against deliberate insults of Hindus and Hinduism by Hindu painters, for example Shri. Subhash Avchat, Dnyanesh Sonar, Mahendra Pandit amongst others. Thus the deliberate misrepresentation of facts by Desai, that campaign against Hussain is because he is a Muslim is irrelevant.
Hussain has painted Durga, Laxmi, Saraswati, etc. in the nude while he paints his step-mother, Prophet's daughter & his own daughter fully clothed. What artistic value has Hussain achieved by disrobing Hindu Goddesses? Hussain has deliberately & intentionally hurt religious sentiments of millions of Hindus by his naked & obscene depiction of their goddesses.
Lord Meghanad Desai has condemned Hindus for protesting
against MF Hussain. He said that Hindus are protesting just because Hussain
is Muslim and that India has tradition of naked "gods" like Khajuraho
scriptures. Many times, supporters of Hussain refer to the erotic sculptures
at Khajuraho and claim that Hinduism is the host to a tradition of nude
and erotic artwork on Deities. What difference does it make if Hussain
or anyone draws any nude painting of a deity when the ancient Hindu tradition
itself is a host to such free artwork?
The answer is the difference lies in the aim and content of the artwork. To understand the aim of sculptures at Khajuraho we would need to have a background of Hindu Philosophy in which "Kaama" (carnal pleasure) has been accorded an equal place among the 3 other objectives of Human Life viz. "Dharma"(Righteousness), "Artha"(wealth) and "Moksha"(Freedom from all bondage and suffering).
1. It is a misconception that since Khajuraho are Temples, they depict sex between deities!
2. It must be emphasized that Khajuraho Temples, do not contain sexual themes inside the Temple premises or near the deity but only on external carvings. Implied meaning of that is for seeing the deity, one must leave his sexual desires outside the Temple.
3. Some studies suggest that since Khajuraho was the breeding ground for "Shaktism", in which sex is considered to be a sacred ritual, such sculptures may have been included.
4. Khajuraho also contains sculptures depicting the day to day life of people of those days. Among these, only 10% of the sculptures depict the sexual life of the people of those days. It is obvious that sex being an inevitable part of human life, is depicted in the sculptures. Sexual themes are not of any deities but related to ordinary humans or at the most celestial beings like courtesans and gandharvas. The rest depict the common man's life of those days. They give the message that one should always have God as the central point in one's life even though one is engaged in worldly activities.
5. In Khajuraho Temples, the idols of Shiva, Nandi, Goddess Durga, Incarnations of Vishnu etc. are fully clothed.
6. All over India, from Kashmir to Kanyakumari deities have been shown in Temples as described in the Shastras and in no Temples have idols of Deities been shown nude and in sexual positions!
The Western media, are primarily responsible for creating the equation "Khajuraho=Eroticism" in the viewer's minds. They know that by creating and nurturing this equation while concealing the underlying spiritual facts, they will be uprooting Hinduism from its very base, "Faith of Hindus towards their Deities". This also seems to be the hidden motive behind M.F. Hussain's paintings.
Related Reading -
This will clarify that the justification of Khajuraho temple carvings for such nude paintings stands lame.
In April 2004, the Delhi High Court has found Hussain guilty of hurting of religious sentiments. The Honourable Justice Kapoor states,
"If one has been granted unlimited freedom, one is required
or expected to use it for good purpose and not with malicious intention,
to defame or degrade religious deities may be mythological, as these immortals
are held in highest esteem and over a period become part of one's day
to day religious life to such an extent that anything adverse said or
printed or painted hurts the religious feelings immensely. Any objectionable,
demeaning caricature or painting of religious deities or gods or goddesses
of any particular religion creates disharmony and ill will amongst different
communities. Even if it is presumed that such a painting is a piece of
art still one cannot be oblivious of the fact that depiction of these
deities or goddesses in full nudity comes within the mischief of deliberate
and malicious act intended to outrage religious feelings of concerned
religion as these goddesses are worshiped by crores of people. .... Under
the garb of freedom of expression no person can be allowed to hurt the
religious feelings of any class of people. This should be known more to
the petitioner who belongs to a different religion. If the petitioner
wants to gauge the depth and the unflinching nature of religious feelings
he may venture and try his hand at his own or any other religion and see
how sensitive religious feelings and beliefs are. Such acts promote enmity
between different groups on grounds of religion and arc prejudicial to
maintenance of harmony. It is the effect that is guiding and determining
Read also: Full verdict
The defense of the (pseudo)Hindus of "freedom of thought and expression enshrined in the Indian constitution" in support of their claim is well over ruled by the High Court through its statement in the verdict. To add to this further Hussain could not be prosecuted then only on the technical grounds of lack of sanction of the Union Government or of the State Governments as is required for trial under Section 295(A) of IPC.
The Central Home Ministry has directed the Police Commissioners of Mumbai and Delhi to initiate appropriate action against the anti-Hindu painter M F Hussain. His Bharatmata painting is under scrutiny by the UPA government. And bureaucrats are also unwilling to give a go-ahead to any public exhibition of this artwork.
This proves that M.F. Hussain and his paintings disturb the communal harmony and give cause for riots.
On 13th April 2006 at the Organization of the Islamic Conference in Istanbul Mr. Annan affirmed the importance of basic freedoms as well as the need for sensitivity towards other cultures. He said, "We must stress that rights carry with them an inherent responsibility, and should not be used to degrade, humiliate or insult any group or individual."
Common man has protested against MF Hussain.
1. Over 28,000 people around the world have registered their protest
against M. F. Hussain, demanding a stop to all public display and auction
of his works.
2. 1250 formal police complaints under banner of Hindu Janajagruti Samiti
3. 7 court cases
4. Burning of Hussain effigies, citywide strikes, Rasta bunds (road blocking).
The magnitude and the nature of the protests speak for itself.
Hussain has also invited the displeasure of Muslim religious leaders in India for his denigrating paintings, which are considered as essentially against Islamic principles. Mr Hazi Yakub Quereshi a Muslim minister from Uttar Pradesh (India) who has declared prize sum of Rs 51 crores of Indian rupees to the person who would slay the cartoonist of the Prophet's cartoons, has advised Hindus to teach M.F Hussain a lesson. In Madhya Pradesh, former Congress leader Akhtar Baig offered nearly 20,000 Euros to the person who would chop off Hussain's hands.
Lord Desai has defamed Hindus by calling them fundamentalists and Anti-Muslim. For knowledge of this pseudo-secular group, "Illyas Khan Pathan" (A Muslim) had filed a petition against M.F. Hussain. What does Lord Desai have to say about this?
This is the reason why Hussain would never dare to make such a painting of the Prophet.
Would these secular people support the Danish cartoonist under the name of artistic freedom?
Hindu Janajagruti Samiti would surely like to know what is the stand of these secular people in the case of Danish Cartoon controversy ?
Now do you agree to this and condemn the appeal of (pseudo) Hindus intellectuals for reinstating Hussain's exhibition and their defaming of Hindu Human Rights and British Hindu Forum ?Click here to read public opinion and voice your opinion