The Indian media widely publicised the Faiz Festival 2023 held in Lahore, Pakistan, between 17 and February 19, after the famous Indian lyricist Javed Akhtar, who attended the event, said in response to a question that the accused in the 26/11 Mumbai terrorist attack are roaming freely in Pakistan. India’s media published this remark with sensational headlines such as ‘Javed Akhtar Tells Pakistan Off Clearly’, and ‘Javed Akhtar Entered Pakistan and Thrashed it’. However, the headlines and stories never mentioned that Akhtar’s audience, primarily Pakistanis, also clapped at this remark.

The significance of the support in Pakistan for Akhtar’s thinly-veiled criticism of the Pakistani establishment cannot be underplayed in the context of recent developments in India. The slightest criticism of a government decision or leaders of the ruling political party can end in attacks by troll armies, if not action by the State, against those who express the contrary view.

The media has been part of this suppression of ideas in India, which is probably why it did not highlight—or chose to censor—Akhtar’s emphasis on Indo-Pak friendship at the event either. The Faiz Festival is Pakistan’s most beloved literary festival, attended by people from around the world. Akhtar also suggested that India and Pakistan should strive to understand each other better. This would have been anathema for most of the mainstream Indian press and the ruling establishment in both countries.

Later, in an interview with an Indian TV channel, Akhtar said the government of India and the Indian people might have differences with the rulers of Pakistan, but why should they harbour anger towards the people of Pakistan? He also said the Pakistani general public wants friendship with India. It hardly needs an explanation why much of the mainstream press has suppressed or underplayed this information. What Akhtar said—he even acknowledged that the people of Pakistan showered him with love during this visit to the country—is against the trend in India to critique not just Pakistan’s State, which has undoubtedly been the source of worries and losses in India, but to blame every Pakistani for the actions of its governments.

The childish way in which a large section of the Indian media handled Akhtar’s visit cloaked the numerous merits of the Faiz Festival, primarily to show how the educated sections of society can pave a path of resistance to oppression. The 7th International Faiz Festival ’23, related to literature, art, music and progressive ideas, was organised by the Faiz Foundation Trust in collaboration with the Lahore Arts Consulate at the Alhamra Art Center Mall Road. Personalities associated with art, literature, music, the film world and progressive thinkers from Pakistan, India and other countries participated in this year’s event.

The chief managers of the festival are Faiz Ahmed Faiz’s daughters, Salima Hashmi and Muneeza Hashmi. This time, apart from Akhtar, litterateur Atul Tiwari from Mumbai and Arvinder Singh from Amritsar participated in the event. For three days, from 11 am to midnight, the participants thronged the three big auditoriums of the Alhamra Center to recite and discuss Faiz’s poetry and discuss the progressive movement in Pakistan. Each session involved conversations with eminent personalities from a variety of fields. For example, Pakistan’s famous ‘Lal Band’ won the attendees’ hearts at the music session.

New Urdu, English and Punjabi books were released, and there were informed discussions on them. The poetry session especially attracted crowds, but so did sessions on ‘Children’s literature in contemporary times’, ‘Role of women in Pakistani politics’, ‘Politics of Economics in Pakistan: An Alternative Perspective’, ‘Role of Women in Pakistani Cinema’, and others. The cuisine also fascinated people, but the most crucial point of this festival is attendees openly discussed the India-Pakistan relationship.

Faiz’s daughter Salima Hashmi told me over the phone, “This was the seventh festival organised in memory of progressive poet Faiz Ahmed Faiz. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the organisers could not hold it for the last few years. In simple words, it is a festival of Faiz lovers spread all over the world. There is talk of knowledge, culture, music and poetry, people’s concerns and pro-people politics here. I believe this event can play an important role in the friendship between India and Pakistan. It is our endeavour that a delegation from India reaches every edition of this festival.”

She said, “Javed Akhtar attended this time, and celebrities like Shabana Azmi and Naseeruddin Shah attended the previous editions. Even today, Faiz’s poetry is loved in both countries. It inspires us to fight against plunder, injustice and exploitation, and that is why, when the youth of both countries raise their voice against injustice, they sing ‘Hum Dekhenge’. If many other countries worldwide can forget their differences and live in peace and brotherhood, why not us? We have a lot in common. Our common language, our common culture, our common sorrows….”

Ali Usman Bajwa, a young Punjabi storyteller who lives in Lahore, Pakistan, also shared his experiences about the festival. He said, “This is an important event in Pakistan, guided by leftist ideology, though people of all ideologies can, and do, visit. Apart from literature and art, the event allows people to toss up ideas and debate them. They especially discuss the Pakistani left—its future and how it can develop. Faiz was a poet of Urdu and Punjabi. He wrote some poems in his mother tongue Punjabi, which is why the session on Punjabi poetry is the most interesting.”

In 2019, Sukirat, a Punjabi litterateur from Indian Punjab, attended the Faiz Festival. Remembering the visit, he says, “It was a very impressive event. Such literary events are rarely seen in India. It simultaneously hosts discussions, music, and readings, and you also find young people getting politically engaged, distributing pamphlets and books, while revolutionary slogans echo throughout the venue.”

Sukirat said that when he visited in 2019, the Pakistani media was filled with news of a boy’s kidnapping in Balochistan. Progressive youth at the festival went around making people aware of this issue. Any festival implies a barrage of colours come together, but at the Faiz Festival, you also find people of different colours coming together by the thousands. It is for Indians to understand why most of the media sought to underplay this aspect of the event dedicated to one of the world’s foremost literary figures.

The author is an independent journalist based in Punjab. The views are personal.

Courtesy: Newsclick

The post What Indian Media Didn’t Tell Us About Faiz Festival in Lahore appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Javed Akhtar Public Response

On 3rd September 2021 when I gave an interview to NDTV I had no idea that it would generate such sharp reactions. On one hand there are some people who have expressed their outrage and anger in the strongest language possible, on the other hand there are people from every nook and corner of the country who have given me messages of solidarity and expressed their total agreement with my point of view. I will surely thank them all but first, I want to respond to the allegations and accusations of those who have hated my above-mentioned interview. Since it is not possible to respond to each critic individually, this is my collective response.

My detractors have said that while I am criticizing the Hindu right wing I have never stood against fanatics among the Muslim fold. They have accused me of not saying anything about triple talaq, of not speaking on purdah or any other regressive practice within the Muslim community. I am not surprised at the fact that they are totally unaware of my activities over the years. After all, I am not such an important person that everyone should know what I am doing or have been doing.

The fact, however, is that, over the past two decades, I have been given police protection twice because of the threats to my life from fanatical Muslims: first, because not only had I vociferously opposed triple talaq when the issue was not on the national radar, but I had, along with an organisation named Muslims for Secular Democracy (MSD), toured several cities across India like Hyderabad, Allahabad, Kanpur and Aligarh and from a variety of public platforms spoken out against this retrograde practice. The impact of this can be envisaged from this: I started getting death threats, that were prominently published in one Mumbai-based Urdu newspaper. This was in 2007, Shri AN Roy, who was then Commissioner of Police, Mumbai actually summoned the editor and publisher of the publication and warned him that if any violent act were to follow, the Mumbai police would hold the newspaper responsible.

In 2010, on a TV channel, I had a debate with a prominent Muslim cleric, Maulana Kalbe Jawwad on the regressive practice of purdah which greatly upset the Maulana and in a few days my effigies were burnt in Lucknow and I started getting hate mails and death threats once more. Again, I was provided protection by the Mumbai police. So to accuse me for not standing up against Muslim fundamentalists is totally baseless.

Some have accused me for glorifying Taliban. Nothing could be further from the truth and more absurd, I have only contempt for people of such a mindset. A little before a week of this said interview on August 24th, 2021 I had tweeted ‘it is shocking that two members of Muslim Personal law board have expressed their extreme happiness at the take-over of AFG by the barbarian Taliban although the board has distance itself but it is not enough. MSLB must give their POV in the most unambiguous words.’

I am re-iterating my opinions here because I don’t want the supporters of Hindu right wing to hide behind the false excuse that I don’t stand up against regressive beliefs and practices within the Muslim community.

They have also accused me of insulting Hinduism and Hindus. There is not an iota of truth in this. Actually, in the recent interview I have said ‘Hindus are the most decent and tolerant majority’ in the world. This I have repeated again and again and have also emphasized that India can never become like Afghanistan because Indians by nature not extremists; it is in their DNA to be moderate, to keep to the middle of the road. Why then, despite these assertions of mine, you will wonder, why are some people are so upset with me? The answer is because I have clearly condemned the extreme right wing, the bigots, the fanatics of each and every community. I have emphasized that there is an uncanny resemblance among the right wing mindsets of every community.

Yes, in this interview I have expressed my reservations against organizations affiliated to the sangh parivar. I am opposed to any school of thought that divides people on the basis of religion, caste and creed and I stand by all those who are against any such discrimination. Perhaps that is why in 2018 one of the most respected temples of India, the ‘Sankat Mochan Mandir’ Varanasi invited me and gave me an unprecedented never before, title and trophy that called me ‘Shanti Doot’ I was also asked to give a talk inside the temple, a rare honor for an atheist like me.

My critics are also outraged that I find a lot of commonalities between the mindsets of Taliban and the Hindu right wing. As a matter of fact, there is a lot of commonality. The Taliban is forming an Islamic government based on religion, the Hindu right wing wants a Hindu Rashtra. The Taliban wants to curb women rights and put them on the margin, the Hindu right wing has also made it clear that they don’t like the freedom of women and girls; right from UP, Gujarat to Karnataka young men and women have been beaten mercilessly for sitting together in a restaurant or a garden or any public place. Like the Muslim fanatics, even the Hindu right wing does not accept the right of women to choose their own spouse. Recently a very important right wing leader has said that women are not capable of being left on their own or being independent. Like the Taliban the Hindu right wing also claims the superiority of faith and astha over any man-made law or court.

The Taliban has no love lost for any minority; similarly, what kind of thoughts and feelings the Hindu right wing nurtures for the minority is evident from their speeches and slogans and whenever they get an opportunity, by their actions.

The only difference between the Taliban and these extremist groups is that Taliban today have unchallenged power in Afghanistan with no one to question them while in India there is a huge resistance against the Indian version of this Talibani ideology which is totally in conflict with the Constitution of India. Our constitution does not discriminate on the basis of religion, community, caste or gender, we have institutions like the judiciary and media too. The key point of departure between the two is the Taliban has achieved its goal in Afghanistan. The Hindu right wing is doing its best to get us there. Fortunately, this is India and there are the Indian people who are providing a stiff resistance.

Some people are also upset that in my interview I have mentioned Mr. MS Golwalkar’s admiration for Nazi Germany and the Nazi way of handling their minority. Mr. Golwalkar was the supremo of the sangh from 1940 to 1973. He authored two books ‘We or our Nationhood defined’ and ‘A Bunch of Thoughts’. These books are easily available on the net. Over the past few years, his followers have started disowning the first book by claiming that this book was not written by the Guru ji. This distancing is because even the worst bigot is not able, today, to defend or justify the contents of the book. They say that giving MS Golwalkar’s name in the book that ran into several editions was just a mistake.

‘We or our Nationhood defined’ was published for the first time in 1939. Mr. Golwalkar was very much in this world till 1973. Between 1939 and 1973, in other words for 34 years, several editions of this book were published but Mr. Golwalkar never disowned this book so obviously his follower’s denial of his authorship is nothing but political expediency. Here I give you one quote from each of his books.

‘We or our Nationhood Defined’, pages 34-35; pages 47-48)

“To keep up the purity of the race and its culture, Germany shocked the world by her purging the country of the Semitic races – the Jews. Race pride at its highest has been manifested here. Germany has also shown how well-nigh impossible it is for races and cultures, having differences going to the root, to be assimilated into one united whole, a good lesson for us in Hindusthan [sic] to learn and profit by…

“the foreign races in Hindusthan (Christians and Muslims) must either adopt the Hindu culture and language, must learn to respect and hold in reverence the Hindu religion, must entertain no idea but those of the glorification of the Hindu race and culture, i.e., of the Hindu nation….. and must lose their separate existence to merge in the Hindu race, or may stay in the country, wholly subordinated to the Hindu Nation, claiming nothing, deserving no privileges, far less any preferential treatment, not even citizen’s rights.”

‘A Bunch of Thoughts, pages 148-164237-238, Part Two, Chapter VI, The Hindu Nation, Section, The Nation and Its Problems XVI. Internal Threat, 1. THE MUSLIMS & … THE CHRISTIANS:

“Even today, Muslims, whether in high position of the Government or outside, participate openly in rabidly anti-national conferences…….

“…Many leading Christian missionaries have often declared unequivocally that their one single aim is to make this country ‘ a province of the Kingdom of Christ’…

These quotes are self-explanatory. I really do not need to say anything more.

It is interesting that while the supporters of Hindu right wing are so upset with me one of their own prominent political leaders has called our Maharashtra Vikas Aghadi (MVA) Government ‘talibani’. I am not a member of any of the three parties who are governing Maharashtra in a coalition government, extremely well under the able chief ministership of Shri Uddhav Thackeray. Today his popularity in Maharashtra rivals that of Mamata Banerjee in Bengal and Stalin in Tamil Nadu. Not even his worst critics can accuse him of any discrimination or injustice. How and why anyone can call Shri Uddhav Thackeray’s government ‘talibani’ is beyond my understanding.

Javed Akhtar
Mumbai September 13, 2021.

The post I have opposed Muslim fanatics: Javed Akhtar appeared first on SabrangIndia.

UPDATE

In the past three days, signatures have been pouring in from the length and breadth of the country as 472 citizens from all walks of life have condemned outright the hounding of intellectuals, poets and actors most especially Javed Akhtar and Naseruddin Shah.

On September 7, days after the hounding of these two public figures, 150 people had signed in their support. Here is the updated List of Signatories dated September 10, 2021 with the text of the statement below

Citizens from all walks of life stand by Javed Akhtar, Naseeruddin Shah

Hundreds of eminent citizens, artists, writers, filmmakers, activists, journalist, academics and others have come together to condemn the ongoing harassment and targeting of Javed Akhtar and Naseeruddin Shah, two of India’s most renowned intellectuals, poets, writers and actors, who are known the world over.

A solidarity statement, which at the time of publishing had around 150 signatories from across the country emphasises that they “support unequivocally the recent interview given by author and poet, Javed Akhtar to the media in the context of the Taliban’s return to power in Afghanistan.” 

Javed Akhtar has been targeted by the right wing ever since he  compared Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), and Bajrang Dal with the Taliban, saying their goals seems and ideology was similar, in an interview to NDTV. Apart from trolling, complaints and protests against him, Bharatiya Janata Party politician Ram Kadam also announced that no movies of which the lyricist was a part of will be allowed to screen till he “issues an apology”.

The signatories of the solidarity statement have strongly condemned all attempts to intimidate him and have affirmed his right to speak his views: “We strongly disagree with those in the sangh parivar, led by a BJP MLA and other elements from the same wider parivar who have objected to the understanding of right wing supremacists, be it of the Muslim or Hindu kind” they stated, adding “Javed Akhtar spoke with clarity and passion. We agree with his statement that irrespective of the religion in whose name they claim to speak, right-wingers — be they Hindu, Muslim, Sikh or Christians — share a common majoritarian world-view. This is particularly evident when it comes to their views on the status of women in the family and in society. The Taliban are but an extreme and violent version of the same common fundamentalist mind-set. It is not for nothing that many in recent years have referred to violent elements from the sangh parivar as the ‘Hindu Taliban’.”

Sections of the Muslim community have also raised similar objections to recent comments by actor Naseeruddin Shah. In a video message which went viral, Shah specifically addressed and reached out to the “Indian Muslim community”. He send out a warning to Muslim compatriots “against rigid forms of Islam, advising an espousal of modernity.” The solidarity statement put on record that “Shah is only re-iterating the long, vibrant and tolerant tradition of Indian Islam that has been in recent decades afflicted by the Saudi-exported Wahhabi Islam, a trend that large sections of Indian Muslims recognise and also deplore.”

Supporters may still sign in here 

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeGzOnZEurCwH5xROZFOYp8nMlNbv8pQSpWW_StAkia8k1e-A/viewform

The entire statement and list of signatures may be viewed here:

Related

Sessions court dismisses Kangana’s plea against Javed Akhtar’s defamation case

Javed Akhtar vs Kangana Ranaut: Mumbai court issues bailable warrant against Ranaut

Javed Akhtar files defamation case against Kangana Ranaut

The post 450+ Citizens from all walks of life stand by Javed Akhtar, Naseeruddin Shah appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Mumbai Sessions Court on April 5, 2021 dismissed Bollywood actress Kangana Ranaut’s revision application challenging the proceedings initiated against her by a magistrate’s court for allegedly defaming veteran lyricist Javed Akhtar.

Additional Sessions Judge S. U. Baghele at Dindoshi dismissed Ranaut’s challenge regarding the issuance of the process, the legality and validity of the February 1 order passed by the Andheri court and the following issuance of a bailable warrant against her for failing to appear before the court.

The actress’s lawyer Rizwan Siddiquee argued that the magistrate had not recorded complainant’s and witnesses’ statements before issuing a notice or proceeding with criminal complaints, as required by the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). Meanwhile, Akhtar’s advocate Jay Bharadwaj had previously opposed her application stating that witnesses were to be examined only if they were present.

In the end, the court said, “No error in the impugned order, as regards its correctness or legality could be pointed out, nor it could be pointed out that there was any irregularity in the proceeding before the learned Magistrate.”

In November 2020, Akhtar filed a complaint against Ranaut for making defamatory statements against him during a television interview on Republic TV that allegedly damaged his reputation.

At the time, the concerned magistrate directed the Mumbai police to do a preliminary probe and later issued a bailable warrant against Ranaut on March 1, after she failed to appear before the court.

The warrant was cancelled on March 25 after the actress padi a cash bail of Rs. 20,000 and a surety of Rs 15,000.

Related:

Javed Akhtar vs Kangana Ranaut: Mumbai court issues bailable warrant against Ranaut
Kangana Ranaut is whining about Twitter, on Twitter, for Twitter restricting her!
Javed Akhtar files defamation case against Kangana Ranaut

The post Sessions court dismisses Kangana’s plea against Javed Akhtar’s defamation case appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Lyricist Javed Akhtar filed a criminal defamation case against actress Kangana Ranaut on November 3, 2020 before the Andheri Metropolitan Magistrate for allegedly making baseless comments during an interview with Republic TV, said LiveLaw.

According to the complaint, Ranaut alleged Akhtar’s involvement in the death of actor Sushant Singh Rajput. She also named him and Mahesh Bhatt as members of a “mafia” that ran the Hindi film industry. Further, she called the veteran poet a “so-called atheist.”

“Their [Akhtar and others] whole group is about keeping an eye on who is Islam friendly and who is not Islam friendly,” she said during the TV interview.

During the interview, the actress also claimed that Akhtar threatened Ranaut from talking about her alleged relationship with actor Hrithik Roshan. The recording of this interview has been viewed by millions of people on YouTube which is damaging to the lyricist’s reputation, said the complaint filed by advocate Naranjan Murangi.

The defamation case, set to be heard on December 3, is not the first legal complaint filed against the actress. Advocate Ali Kaashif Khan Deshmukh approached the Magistrate in late-October against the Ranaut and her sister Rangoli Chandel for allegedly tweeting promoting Hindu-Muslim disharmony and making malicious comments against the judiciary. The court accordingly directed an inquiry against the two persons. Similarly, casting director Sahil Ashrafali Sayyed complained against her and Chandel on October 17 for promoting communal enmity.

The actress faced an FIR issued by the Karnataka court for allegedly tweeting against farmers protesting the controversial central farm laws.

Related:

Film industry being maligned by insiders: Jaya Bachchan in RS

Jihadis hide under the garb of secularism: Kangana Ranaut targets liberals

Hindu Mahasabha, 62 celebs slam 49 intellectuals behind “Jai Shree Ram” letter to PM

Atheism in times of Corona

The post Javed Akhtar files defamation case against Kangana Ranaut appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Expressing his sharp disapproval of BJP’s  decision to nominate a terror accused from the Bhopal seat, Akhtar said, “Don’t go by her appearance. Just because a person looks like a saint doesn’t mean the person is a saint. Don’t forget that when Ravana came to abduct Sita, he too was dressed like a saint.” Akhtar was speaking at a press conference in Bhopal on May 2.

Further hitting out at BJP’s ‘poor choice’ of candidate, Akhtar said, “You (BJP) should have looked for a place which is inhabited by illiterate, communal people and made her contest from there. Democracy can only flourish if there is a clear demarcation between the state and religion.”

Warning the BJP against mixing religion with politics, Akhtar emphasized that countries where state and religion work together, democracy can never work. He then went on to cite the examples of the Middle-East and Latin America.

The complainant has alleged that Akhtar had intentionally made objectionable remarks against Pragya in order to provoke the voters. The complaint also mentions about another statement by Akhtar wherein he said that not all saffron clad people are sadhus, similarly Sadhvi Pragya also isn’t a sadhu.

The petitioner has requested the court to act against Akhtar under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code that deals with defamation. The hearing is scheduled for May 24.

Akhtar had earlier drawn ire from the right-wing Hindu extremists after he said that ghoonghats and burqas are the same so both should be banned. Responding to the demand for banning burqa in Shiv Sena’s mouthpiece Saamna, Akhtar had said, “There is a controversy over the burqa. Iran is a hardliner Muslim country, but women don’t cover their faces there. A new law in Sri Lanka bars women from covering their faces. Whatever is your attire, the face should be visible.” Adding further, he said, “If someone wants this kind of law here, and if this is somebody’s opinion I don’t have any objection. But before the end of last phase of elections, the government must announce that no woman will be allowed to use ghoonghat in Rajasthan. Faces covered with the burqa or the ghoonghat, it’s the same. If both would be removed, I would be happy.”

Rajput Karni Sena, a Rajasthan-based organisation, issued death threats to Akhtar over these comments. Jivan Singh Solanki, president of the Maharashtra wing of the Karni Sena, published a video in which he is heard saying, “We will gouge out your eyes and pull out your tongue if you don’t apologise. We will enter your house and beat you.” Warning Akhtar of dire consequences if he doesn’t apologise, Solanki said, “The burqa is associated with terrorism and (is a question of) national security. We have asked Akhtar to render an apology within three days or face the consequences.”

Later, Akhtar clarified his statement by tweeting, “Some people are trying to distort my statement. I have said that may be in Sri Lanka it is done for security reasons but actually it is required for women empowerment. covering the face should be stopped whether naqab or ghoonghat.”

Akhtar showed neutrality by saying that Congress president Rahul Gandhi hadn’t done anything to prove that he is capable of becoming a prime minister. He then praised BJP leaders like Arun Jaitley, Sushma Swaraj, and Atal Bihari Vajpayee but expressed discontent with PM Modi and called BJP president Amit Shah his “assistant.”

With every passing day, expressing dissent or speaking against the ruling government makes one appear as ‘anti-national.’ This is posing a severe threat on our constitutional freedom of speech and expression. Such judicial actions and threats by people close to the party affects the democratic structure and the foundation of our nation.

Related Articles:

1. Today the basic question is not just of freedom of speech, but also freedom after speech
2. Opinion: Why are Muslims blamed for the crimes committed against them?
3. Hindutva Poses the Greatest Threat to Women

The post Criminal Defamation Suit Filed Against Javed Akhtar For Comparing Sadhvi Pragya to Ravana appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Image: PTI

So we know now, in case we did not know it already: Bollywood celebrity and outgoing Rajya Sabha MP, Javed Akhtar is a “Good Muslim”, and so are the Sufis who invited Prime Minister Narendra Modi to grace the World Sufi Forum in Delhi. Asaduddin Owaisi of the Majlis Ittehadul Muslimeen (MIM) on the other hand, as all of us always knew, is a “Bad Muslim”.

Actor and Modi-bhakt Anupam Kher says it just like it is: “Bharat Mata ki jai!” is the “only real test” of who is a desh premi and who is not. Self-proclaimed atheist Akhtar and the Sufis have passed the test with flying colours. In his last speech in the Rajya Sabha, Akhtar theatrically recited the magic mantra not once but thrice. At the World Sufi Conference, Modi’s elaborate “Islam means peace” homily was greeted with repeated chants of “Bharat Mata ki Jai”. (Thankfully, no one offered a “Muslim cap” to Modi, a man otherwise known to don every other head gear when it suits him).

Video: Rajyasabha TV

Owaisi, on the other hand, has declared in a speech that while he has no issues with “Jai Hind”, he will not put himself through Hindutva’s nationalism-test even if someone held a knife to his throat. Taking a cue from his party chief, on March 16 an MIM MLA, Waris Pathan, refused to say “Bharat Mata ki jai!” in the Maharashtra Assembly. The refusal created a huge furore wherein along with the ruling BJP-Shiv Sena coalition, the Congress and the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) joined the chorus against Pathan. He was suspended from the Assembly for the entire budget session.

Video: ANI

No one however seemed in the least concerned over Shiv Sena MLA Gulabrao Patil hurling the following at Pathan: “Is desh mein rehna hai, kutto, to Vande Mataram bolna hoga” (If you want to stay in this country, dogs, you will have to sing Vande Mataram). Having spoken in the plural, it is anybody’s guess whether Patil was referring to the MIM in particular or Indian Muslims in general. As an afterthought a day later, on the demand raised by the Congress party’s leader of the Opposition in the Assembly, Radhakrishna Vikhe-Patil, the Speaker agreed to delete the Sena MLA’s obnoxious remark from the Assembly’ record.

Everyone must be patriotic, and patriotism will be defined by the bully, those who can shout the loudest, have their way. You will be tested on not just the slogans you raise but on those you do not raise. Patriotism will be forced by the BJP and its parivar, but not just by them. If you are deemed to be not patriotic enough, be very afraid, also, of the Congress. (Indian Express, lead editorial)

The Sufis assembled at the Delhi meet will no doubt maintain, as many other Muslims do, that “Bharat Mata ki jai!” has nothing to do with religion; it’s about love for the nation. They argue moreover that Muslims who oppose the slogan are falling into a trap set by the sangh parivar. The Congress general secretary, Digvijay Singh, has expressed the same opinion. Such reasoning is problematic as it skirts several critical questions.

From the Hyderabad Central University, to Jawaharlal Nehru University, to everywhere else, the sanghis who to their eternal shame had nothing to do with India’s freedom struggle, have now delegated to themselves the sole supreme authority to judge who is a patriot and who is not using a simple 4-word-test.

Why is “Jai Hind”, “Jai Bharat” or “Hindustan Zindabad” not enough? Why is the singing of the national anthem not enough? Which Constitutional principle, which law of the land is violated if some Muslims genuinely believe that saying “Bharat Mata ki Jai” is against the teachings of Islam? Why is it that Muslims who have no difficulty in saying the same words, at a Kejriwal rally for example, have a problem with Hindutva’s diktat?  Is the nationalism bogey not simply an insidious ploy to push secular-democratic India towards Hindu Rashtra?

Why can’t the Congress Party, the NCP see what’s amply clear not only to the Left parties (“A single slogan cannot ever become the sole patriotism test of citizens”: CPI-M general secretary, Sitaram Yechuri) but also sections of the media?

Take, for example, the lead editorial in the March 18 edition of The Indian Express under the headline:  “Hand of the bully: Congress must take responsibility for its role in the disgraceful suspension from the Maharashtra Assembly of Paris Pathan”: And the copy starts with: “Everyone must be patriotic, and patriotism will be defined by the bully, those who can shout the loudest, have their way. You will be tested on not just the slogans you raise but on those you do not raise. Patriotism will be forced by the BJP and its parivar, but not just by them. If you are deemed to be not patriotic enough, be very afraid, also, of the Congress.”

And the lead editorial in The Asian Age warns: “Were the Maharashtra Assembly mood to gain force… we would be going astray as a people and bringing upon ourselves every curse that wakes in the wake of the wilful distortion of the historical record.”

Through their unsolicited ‘Bharat Mata ki jai’ chant in Parliament and at the Sufi Forum, Javed Akhtar and the Sufis have built their distance not only from “Bad Muslims” but also from millions of Hindus who refuse to endorse the claim of Hindu Nationalists that this, and this slogan alone, is the real test of every Indians’ love for and loyalty to his country.

At an informal gathering of Kanhaiya Kumar and a few JNU students on the campus about a week ago, one of them asked: we students at JNU, Hyderabad University and elsewhere have been fighting Hindutva’s  fascist menace; why are Muslim leaders and organisations so silent when they too should be concerned about the same thing?

About Owaisi and his party with a blatantly Muslim-communal agenda, the less said the better. If anything, the MIM’s politics is rich material for a case study on how not to combat Hindutva’s designs. For many Muslims across the country, it is an article of faith that the MIM is in cahoots with the BJP-RSS as both benefit from spreading the poison of communalism. Some even talk of crores changing hands.

But what might Javed Akhtar and the Sufis have to say in response to the query by the JNU student?

If not as a Muslim, what stopped Akhtar from speaking out against the growing witch-hunt, doctored videos by TV channels, takeover of not just educational campuses but even court premises by lynch mobs with state connivance? Not earlier, when academics, writers and artists (many of them atheists, though not communists) returned awards in protest, nor in his speech in the Rajya Sabha?

His speech said nothing more than what could be expected from a detached sage having descended from some ashram in the Himalayas for a brief glance at the state of the nation. Words of wisdom totally bereft of any reference, except obliquely, to the ugly climate being built up in the country with active encouragement from the RSS-directed, Modi-led, BJP-dominated, NDA government at the Centre.

As for the Sufis who took pains to ingratiate themselves with the prime minister, here’s some interesting bit of history. Among the main players in the All India Ulama and Mashaikh Board (AIUMB) who organised the World Sufi Forum are the management and direct beneficiaries of the dargahs of Hazrat Nizamuddin Auliya (Delhi) and Khwaja Moinuddin Chisti (Ajmer). Anyone familiar with the life and times of these saints will tell you that keeping a distance, never cosying up or currying favours, from the powers that be was almost an obsession with the Sufis.

During his lifetime, Hazrat Nizamuddin was witness to the rise and fall of eight different sultans who occupied the throne. It is well-known that the saint strongly disapproved of, actively discouraged, any of these sultans even from paying a royal visit to his abode. Amir Khusro, the most renowned disciple of the saint was also an officer in the court of Jalaluddin Khilji. Khusro came to know that eager to somehow seek the Hazrat Nizamuddin’s blessings, the sultan was planning on visiting the saint in disguise. Khusro leaked the news to Hazrat Nizamuddin who promptly left the city to foil the sultan’s surreptitious plan.      

Furious with such “treachery” and “disclosure of state secret”, Khilji demanded an explanation from Khusro. This is what the latter said in his defense: “I had to choose between betraying my peer and betraying you. In betraying my peer I would have lost my imaan (faith); in betraying you I stand to lose only my jaan (life). I would sooner lose my jaan than my imaan”. An impressed Khilji forgave Khusro his great betrayal.

Recounting this incident from history, a devout Sufi practitioner told SabrangIndia: “You could say that in hosting the prime minister, the organisers of the World Sufi Forum have betrayed their Chisti tradition (the silsala to which most of the Sufis in India belonged), if not their imaan.

Among the many Sufi silsilas (orders) there were some who stood aloof from power, even spoke truth to power. Others provided legitimacy to the ruler of the day. While Hazrat Nizamuddin and Khwaja Moinuddin belonged to the former category, the organisers of the Delhi meet who otherwise swear by these very saints have chosen a contrary path.

Through their unsolicited ‘Bharat Mata ki jai’ chant in Parliament and at the Sufi Forum, Javed Akhtar and the Sufis have built their distance not only from “Bad Muslims” but also from millions of Hindus who refuse to endorse the claim of Hindu Nationalists that this, and this slogan alone, is the real test of every Indians’ love for and loyalty to his country.

The growing influence of Saudi Arabia-fuelled rigid and intolerant version of Islam should be a matter of concern for all Indians, Muslims particularly. The AIUMB could have played a very positive role in preserving India’s syncretic tradition, stemming the Wahhabi tide. But from the brand of Sufism on display at the Delhi meet, it is seems that the answer for Indian Muslims lies elsewhere.
Perhaps they should give some thought to what Omid Safi, an American professor of Islamic studies wrote some years ago in the American context, but which is equally relevant in our present context: “If our public discourse about religion and politics is to evolve to a more subtle, and accurate, space, it must get to the point where religious voices that speak from the depths and heights of all spiritual traditions can do more than simply acquiesce in the face of the Empire. They can, and should, speak for the weak, and give voice to the voiceless”.

Or, closer home, they could pay heed to two liberation theologists from Pakistan, Junaid S Ahmed and Sania Sufi: “Muslims must dig through the Islamic canon for a discourse far more liberating than merely the negation of beheadings or senseless violence or intolerance”.
 

The post ‘Good Sufi’, ‘Bad Muslim’ appeared first on SabrangIndia.

An intrinsic part of the society they inhabit, music-makers, music will always echo the voice of their times

I have been writing screen plays for the last 35 years, I have never in my life read a book on screenplay writing. I’ve been writing lyrics, I have never read an article on lyric writing. I’ve been writing poetry, I have yet to read anything about poetry writing. I’ve read poetry but not about poetry writing. So I have total ignorance as far as the theory is concerned – It is flawless, unadulterated. Whatever I know, I have learnt on the job. And as far as film lyrics are concerned, my job had started much before I joined the film industry because I was interested in films and film songs.

Songs in films are like a part of the drama, a part of the narrative, and this was not invented by Indian cinema. It is thousands of years old. This is the way we narrate stories; this is the way we tell our tales. Whether Sanskrit plays like Mrichakatika, Ramleela or Krishnaleela, rural theatre, called nautanki or in Bengal, jatra, and so on. Before the emergence of the Talkies you had Urdu-Parsi theatre, which was urban theatre. All forms of drama invariably had songs. This is the way India has been telling and hearing its stories and tales, with songs.

I, having read no books myself, have recently written a book about film songs. Here I tried to guess the sources from which we have taken our vocabulary, our structure, our style. Before Alam Ara, a film made in the ’30s, there was, as I mentioned, Urdu-Parsi theatre. Urdu-Parsi theatre had songs and employed famous writers like Agha Hashar Kashmiri and Munshi Badil and even their scenes were often written in poetry and rhyme. "Kahiye shahbaz-e-zamana, Aapne is nacheez ko pehchana?" The king asks a rebel who is standing in front of him in court, chained. The prisoner replies, "Pehchana, pehchana, Shaitan ko kaun nahi janta hai? Balki har ek pehchanta hai! Shakl-surat dekh li, Kibr-o-raunat (pride and arrogance) dekh li, Naam pehle se suna tha, Aaj surat dekh li." The king says, "Badzubaan, Tu zanjeeron mein jakda hai, Aur phir bhi akda hai? Sar se guroor-e-masnad-e-o-makhmal (pride of power and glory) nahi gaya, Rassi tamaam jal gayi par bal nahi gaya!" That was how it went, and then, off and on, one would start singing. Now, I have read these plays. Many of them are set in an Egyptian background, or the hero is a Roman soldier, the heroine a Jewish princess, and so on and so forth. But be it Marcus or Helen, even they sang "more balma nahi aaye" or they sang a ghazal as the play progressed. It was quite evident, when I read those plays and heard that music, that Urdu-Parsi theatre, which in a way was a forerunner of Hindi cinema and Hindi cinema music, had two sources – folk and the traditional Urdu ghazal. It took from both sources and in many places it synthesised.

As in the early songs of Pankaj Mullick where we see both languages working together, for instance in the famous ‘Pran chahe naina na chahe’. In the song’s antara are the lines: "Jhadte hai phool phagun ke, phagun ke mahine mein, Main tumse juda hota hoon, ek dard liye seene mein". The first line has the language of the North Indian folk song: "Jhadte hai phool phagun ke, phagun ke mahine mein", but the second line is pure ghazal: "Main tumse juda hota hoon, ek dard liye seene mein". This synthesis of Hindi and Urdu, rural and urban, was evolved right in the beginning of Hindi music. Hindi films and Hindi film music are extremely liberal, large hearted, open-minded; they are not conservative at all. In fact I am surprised when people talk of fusion now, that they believe fusion is a discovery of the last 20 years. That’s just not true. If you listen to songs by Pankaj Mullick, or later, Naushad, or Madan Mohan, you see that what they were doing, without being aware of it, was fusion. When people didn’t know there was a gas called oxygen it wasn’t as if they were breathing something else. They were still breathing oxygen.

Similarly, perhaps the word fusion did not exist – but if you hear the music of, say, Pankaj Mullick or RC Boral, their tunes are totally Shastriya Sangeet-based but their orchestration is western, symphonic. They used the trumpet, they used the cello, they used violins. Take songs like ‘Tu jaha jaha chalega mera saaya saath hoga’ by Madan Mohan from the film Mera Saaya. Now, this song is pure Nand raga – unchanged, unaltered, but the entire orchestration is western, symphonic. The rest of the world is discovering these experiments now, just as the USA is discovering neem now when our grandmothers knew about neem hundreds of years ago, and it is the same for fusion. In fact, Hindi film music started and evolved with fusion – fusion of musical instruments, fusion of language, fusion of traditions. Now, with time it changed. Because it is dynamic, it is not static. It has never been shy of changes. And that’s why it is living. That’s why it is spreading.

As far as lyrics are concerned, in the ‘40s and ‘50s, some words were used because the rural influence existed and was very evident in film songs. Words like balma (lover) or many others with a rural base were gradually pruned and marginalised over time, and went out of the vocabulary. While every second song in the ’30s and ’40s had the word balma in it, you probably won’t find the word used in any popular song of the past decade. Why did this word become obsolete? And I am looking at just one case when in fact there are many such words. There is a definite socio-economic reason behind this shift.

Music also moves with life and society. With time we are developing speed but I’m afraid we are developing speed at the cost of depth

To begin with, we don’t have many theatres in this country. Even today, in a country of 100 crore people, we have barely 14,000 theatres, whereas in the USA, where there are 28 crore people, there are almost 1 lakh theatres. So theatre and cinema going, movie watching, is strictly an urban phenomenon. There are hardly any theatres in the villages. So why was there rural vocabulary and why and how did it become obsolete?

Let’s try and understand this shift.

In the ’30s and ’40s, industrialisation was not so widespread, you had some mills in Bombay, Kanpur or Calcutta, but ultimately India was not really an industrialised country. So, by and large, the middle class was an extension of the landed gentry. They were teachers, professors, bureaucrats, doctors, engineers, but they were the extended family of the agrarian class, of the landed gentry. They had their ties, their roots, in the village. Their source of affluence was the village with which they shared strong cultural connections. And that is why they were comfortable with a song that was rural in its temperament. Industrialisation developed a new middle class that had nothing to do with the village. They had no nostalgia, no romantic notions about rural life. So the hero or the heroine, the protagonist ceased to be somebody from that milieu. The hero ceased to be a farmer or someone who lives in the village. Even the romantic notion of an innocent villager coming to the big city has lost its appeal. The only exception over the past several years has been Lagaan where the hero is a villager. And here, too, the hero is actually not a villager but an Indian fighting the British.

This paradigm shift has changed the language of the Hindi film song. Songs started becoming more and more urban. There were two things happening simultaneously over the last 50 years. One – a disconnection from rural roots; and two – the shrinking sphere of Urdu in northern India. You make Hindi films particularly for northern India because that is supposedly the Hindi belt although Hindi films are screened everywhere. But obviously, North India is the main market, of Hindi speaking people, Hindustani speaking people. Sahir Ludhianvi, Shakeel Badayuni, Raja Mehdi Ali Khan, Rajendra Krishan, these people had very strong roots in the Urdu language and they wrote songs that were poem-like or close to ghazals. Many music directors had also come from the background of Urdu, like Madan Mohan, Naushad, Khaiyyam, Husn Lal Bhagat Ram, so they had a certain facility for composing ghazals. Even when they composed a tune, their tunes were in the ghazal format (in
India the ghazal has 12-14 meters). As the Urdu language lost ground, such music and such music directors became more and more scarce.

In the ’40s and ’50s, stories had a certain idealism because society had a certain idealism. There was a collective aspiration. There was a collective dream. So the hero was the common man, unlike the ’90s and today, when the hero is essentially from a rich family and does nothing but sing songs. He used to be a working person – a farmer, a mill worker, a truck driver, a taxi driver, an unemployed youth sometimes, a clerk, a teacher, a lawyer, a doctor, but a working person. And, more often than not, the story dealt with a socio-economic problem. Rich people were bad people. Poor people were good people. And we were waiting for the time when everybody would become affluent. Affluence was around the corner and good days were on the next page of the calendar. At that time, when we had such idealistic stories around this collective dream, the song situations were provided by the story to celebrate these dreams. You could write songs like ‘Woh subah kabhi toh aayegi’ – it was possible. So the meter, the story, the situation, the temperament of the music and the sensibility of the filmmakers and the audience, who were aware of literature, poetry, all of this provided an atmosphere conducive for good songs. And you got good songs.

That was a time when life had an easy pace, everyone had the space to breathe, society was less industrialised, and there was some time for leisure. People had time to ponder. And what happened then? The tempo increased, the tempo of life, and so did the tempo of music. If society moves at a frantic speed, music cannot be medium-paced. It too will become very fast.

Music also moves with life and society. With time we are developing speed but I’m afraid we are developing speed at the cost of depth. We lost idealism, so did the lyric. We, as a society, accepted and imbibed a certain crudity, a certain vulgarity, a certain insensitivity, and that reflected in the music as well as the lyric.

I don’t think it is a matter of chance that your best songs were during the time of Jawaharlal Nehru and your worst music and worst lyrics have come at a time when Mr. LK Advani was ruling the roost. I think songs like ‘Sarkailo khatiya jaada lage’ and the speeches of Mr. LK Advani belong to the same package. On the other hand, as the crude reactionary fascist attitudes in society gradually begin to recede, you can once again see that there is an urge for better music, better lyrics, better words. So let’s hope that India, Indian politics, Indian films and Indian film lyrics will see better days in the future.

Archived from Communalism Combat, February  2005 Year 11    No.105, Cover Story 3
 

The post Talking songs appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Pakistan says we have nothing to do with extremism in Kashmir. Similiarly, the BJP says we have nothing to do with what VHP, Bajrang Dal says. Should we listen to Laxman or to Kalraj Mishra, Acharya Giriraj Kishore and Pravin Togadia? Ultimately the BJP has to make a choice. So long as they keep their relations with these fellows, how can they expect Muslims to take them seriously.

I think we should respond to Bangaru Laxman’s statements the same way that the Indian government responds to Musharraf’s statements. We have justifiably have told Musharraf that no dialogue is possible until his deeds match his words. As long as Pakistan continues supporting terrorism, there is no point in talking to Pakistan because it shows they are not really interested in dialogue. We should treat Laxman’s statements similarly. We should treat all fundamentalists on par; we should not communicate either with Musharraf or with the BJP.

Archived from Communalism Combat, September 2000 Year 8  No. 62, Cover Story 5

The post The BJP president is talking like Pakistan’s Parvez Musharraf’ appeared first on SabrangIndia.