Hindutva and Self-Pity

"By attacking Doniger's work for discussing sensuality in Hindu life, her opponents display a Victorian hangover with a Taliban temperament." - http://t.co/CFBtkJokpW

"When you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you" said Nietzsche a while back. He might as well be talking about these Hindutva extremists. The most articulate expression of the Hindutva's visceral hatred towards Islam and Christanity is, paradoxically, their imitation of the worst features of these very traditions -- to "display the Victorian hangover with a Taliban temperament."

At the very core of the Hindutva project is the profound sense of self-pity and a sense of shame at the perceived lack of coherence of Hinduism. Ashamed of the inherent ambiguities of Hinduism, they want to mimic the very religions and cultures that their politics makes it expedient to hate. Islam has "The book", we must also have one - look we have Gita! One central god figure? Here -- we have Ram. See, second to no one!

Of course, a self pitying person is doubly ashamed. He is ashamed the second time as the recipient of his own pity. Self pity is recursive. And one way to come out of this uncomfortable recursion that Hindutvawadis have found is to cloak the underlying shame in the language of pride and honor.

Useful Idiots

With elections in sight
and looking to increase
their political might,
the parties,
on the left and on the right,
are attracting foot soldiers,
- not necessarily very bright,
but who,
even on the slightest provocation,
are ever ready to fight -
on TV shows, radio talks or on internets,
and think of themselves
as righteous warriors on chariots
but in reality
are perhaps mere useful idiots.



P.S. - Useful idiots in prose.

Kamal and Rajkumar

So there were these two friends -- Kamal and Rajkumar. They were very close but they had different political affiliations. They respected each other very much so one would never attack other's political party or leaders directly as they knew it could lead to avoidable bitterness between them. However, they were both smart and well meaning chaps. So they devised a method to put their points across to each other in such a way that it wouldn't affect their friendship -- they would tell jokes and stories to each other.

I thought that was a very clever thing to do. And sometimes the stories they told were themselves clever too. Recently, I overheard one such conversation between them. Following is a faithful reproduction of it. 

Kamal: So there was this boy in our school who wasn't very bright. He had trouble understanding and remembering things. Once for an essay recitation exam, he memorized few essays. But on the day of the exam he forgot everything except the essay on Cow. So, when the teacher asked him to recite an essay on "Our Village", he started "Our village has many cows. The cows have four legs and a tail. They're white in color. They give milk..."

"No, no, that's not what I asked", the teacher stopped him. "Lets try again - recite an essay on Horse".

He again started - "Horse is an animal like cow. Cows have four legs and a tail. They're white ..."

The teacher again had to stop him. But, whatever the student was asked, he would always somehow relate it to the only thing he knew and not pay any attention to the topic. It would have been a really funny thing, if it weren't also so pathetic. Still, everyone had good laugh at his expense.

Rajkumar: Ahh, the school stories! I am also reminded of one from my school. So there was this student taking the Hindi grammar test. He was considered very bright and he had prepared really well for the exams. He was so confident that some students even thought that he already knew what questions the teacher would ask. But that probably was just a rumor.

Anyway, his test started well. Teacher asked him to make a sentence using the word Gau (गौ). He quickly answered - "Gau hamari maata hai". Teacher then asked him to make a sentence on Dhara (धरा). He again fluently answered - "Hindustan ki dhara ke nivasi Hindu hain".

The teacher them asked him to do a Sandhi (संधि) or joining of these two words and speak a sentence on it. But he just stared at the teacher's face for a moment and simply ran away from the class.

It's not as funny a story as yours but I haven't still figured out why he couldn't use all his apparent brilliance to answer "Godhara" (Gau+Dhara) and make just a simple sentence on it.

and a tail.

Shivji's Matrimonial Disclaimer

Haryanvi ragini from Oye Lucky, Lucky Oye! movie in which Shivji summons all his humility to dissuade Parvarti from marrying him. One of my favorite. 

My attempt at translation for those not too familiar with Haryanvi: 

तू राज्जा की राजदुलारी, मैं सिर्फ लंगोटे आला सूँ |
भांग रगड़ कै पिया करूं, मैं कुंडी सोट्टे आला सूँ |

[While you're a beloved princess, I am a mere loincloth clad,
I grind and drink bhaang; mortar & pestle are all I've got.]

तू राज्जा की छोरी सै, म्हारै इक भी दासी दास नही|
शाल दुशाले औढ़न आली, म्हारै कम्ब्बल तक भी पास नही|

[While you're a king's daughter, I have not a single servant;
O! wearer of expensive shawls, I don't even have a blanket.]

तू बागा की कोयल सै, अड़े बरफ पड़ै हरी घास नही |
किस तरयहा दिल लागै तेरा, शतरंज, चौपड़, ताश नही |

[While you're a beautiful bird of garden, here it's all snow and no grass;
How will you entertain yourself - there're no cards, chaupar or chess.]

किसी साहूकार तै भ्या करवा ले, साहूकार तै भ्या करवा ले,
मैं खालिस टोट्टे आला सूँ,
भांग रगड़ के पिया करूं, मैं कुंडी सोट्टे आला सूँ |

[Get married to a wealthy merchant,
Destitution is all I've got,
I grind and drink bhaang; mortar & pestle are all I've got.]

मैं धूने में तपया करूं, तू आग देख कै डर जागी|
राख घोल के पीया करूं, मेरा भाग देख कै डर जागी|

सौ सौ साँप पड़ै रै गल मै, नाग देख कै डर जागी|
ताण्डव नाच करे बन मै, रंग राग देख कै डर जागी|

[I burn in meditation, the fire will frighten you;
I survive on ash and water, my fate will shock you;

Hundreds of serpents around my neck, the snakes will frighten you;
I perform Tandav in jungle, the excitement will startle you.]

तनै ज़ुल्फ़ों वाला छोरा चाहिये, ज़ुल्फ़ों वाला छोरा चाहिये
मैं लम्बे चोटे आला सूँ|
भांग रगड़ के पिया करूं, मैं कुंडी सोट्टे आला सूँ |

[You need one with flowing hairs, 
I have mere dreadlocks;
I grind and drink bhaang; mortar & pestle are all I've got.]

Propensity towards Conspiracy Theories

Unable to contemplate beyond binaries, the limited mind, when confronted with the greater possibilities of the world, found a useful and convenient tool in the conspiracy theory. If something is not with us, the limited mind thought, then it must surely be a conspiracy against us.

Fun exercise: Observe a person, an organization or a political group that is predisposed towards conspiracy theories. More than an even chance that they also have an essentially limited and rigid world view.

Perspectives

So, I had this epiphany which seems rather straightforward now but let me still share it.

It started with reading how our 3D vision works - the basic stuff. How each of our eyes only provides just a 2D image to our mind; with no depth information. It is the mind that then synthesizes these two ever so slightly different 2D images to construct a field of vision that has a third dimension -- depth -- in it.

I think it's a very useful analogy to also think about how we construct much of our conception of the reality around us. The more different types of perspectives we can bring to bear on this reality -- social, political, economical, cultural, historical -- the more "depth", in some relevant and useful sense, we can perceive in the synthesized view.

A corollary to this is that the more you align or identify closely with a particular ideology or a way of looking at things, the more "depth" you may be giving up.

Of course, nothing earth-shatteringly original about this line of thought, but yeah it caught my fancy.

Einstein and Tagore Discussion

Awesome! 

Einstein and Tagore in a discussion on the nature of knowledge and reality. Unsurprisingly perhaps, Einstein takes a realist position and Tagore a completely idealist one. (The terms idealist/realist used in the philosophical sense which is quite different from the sense in which they are generally used in political theory. Basically, the philosophical realists believe that there exists some reality "out there" which is independent of human mind and idealists believe that since everything is known to us through our minds we can not be sure about existence of such an external reality. Every thing we know is somehow shaped by our mind; to what degree we are in no position to determine.)

It's very tempting to relate idealism to some sort of subjectivism. So, I found it particularly interesting how Tagore even while maintaining the idealist stance articulates hows the concept like objective knowledge would still make sense.

Excerpts:

EINSTEIN: I cannot prove scientifically that Truth must be conceived as a Truth that is valid independent of humanity; but I believe it firmly. I believe, for instance, that the Pythagorean theorem in geometry states something that is approximately true, independent of the existence of man. 

[...]

TAGORE: [...] In any case, if there be any Truth absolutely unrelated to humanity then for us it is absolutely non-existing.

It is not difficult to imagine a mind to which the sequence of things happens not in space but only in time like the sequence of notes in music. For such a mind such conception of reality is akin to the musical reality in which Pythagorean geometry can have no meaning. There is the reality of paper, infinitely different from the reality of literature. For the kind of mind possessed by the moth which eats that paper literature is absolutely non-existent, yet for Man’s mind literature has a greater value of Truth than the paper itself. In a similar manner if there be some Truth which has no sensuous or rational relation to the human mind, it will ever remain as nothing so long as we remain human beings.

EINSTEIN: Then I am more religious than you are!

P.S. Does anyone understands the context in which Einstein says the last line? Does he mean that he is more religious because he is a realist and Christianity subscribes to it?