Secularism is an important understanding. This blogger is a great admirer of Indian understanding of secularism that is each 
religion is a way of understanding and reaching God. I am quite a skeptic of western secularism which tends to draw a line between faith and everything else, reducing religion to isolation or ridiculed into irrational or superstition. It is not at all surprising since in West religion has had history of atrocities on secular activities- the ‘dark ages’ wherein anything that contradicted the religion were prosecuted. Since religion in West did intrude/contradicted the secular, the rational, Renaissance (to some extend even Protestants) was a reaction, an outburst for individuality, an attempt to claim public space, assertion of freedom of expression. Secularism therefore was an attempt to keep religion away from public space. Further as a reaction it became acceptable to ridicule or lampoon religious symbols taken to extreme in the name of freedom of expression.
This idea or practice of secularism maybe acceptable in West since it follows their narration but to apply that to other societies is flawed. This alien understanding can be a cause of discontent. Of course there definitely are universal elements like on Truth as also criticizing inhuman practices, upholding sacredness of individual rights which can be trampled even by religion that has no reference point to west (followers of Hinduism did heinous crimes is on record but the religion as such was open to experimentation on ideas and thinking). The Western understanding of secularism does have some of the positives that need to be cherished.
Freedom of Expression defines civilized society. Every individual should have the right to explore life to his/her potential (here it needs to be pointed out that every individual is creative in their own way and that creativity is not confined to certain occupations, to get precedence). Any hindrance to this is curtailing of human rights. However since we live in society it has to work in context, there is a need to strike balance particularly when it is the question of faith. All faith (crystallized as Religion) works at two level: One is symbols that are holy scriptures, places of worships, images of god/holy figures and so on that are venerated. Second is the level that transcends these, spiritual- to put it in words, where one understands meanings beyond these symbols, have an enlightened encompassing faith and so world view. The intention of all religions and great saints is to take humans to this level of understanding. It is a path, it is a process that is very individual. Even in collective participation the change has to be from within.
However despite these egalitarian intentions of Religion most people find it difficult to take the path, it maybe due to various f
actors most prominent being getting into the rut of occupations to survive. Therefore except minuscule percentage of people most very strongly associate with symbols and therefore cause of strife if stifled with. Taking the specific instance of painters (artists who seems to have monopoly over creativity!!) since they have been in controversy in recent times it need be stressed that an evolved artist will have an empathic understanding of predicaments of people vis a vis faith. Therefore he/she will respect the images that are revered by common people. Further if the intention is to explore ideas, truth and so on then an evolved artist (necessarily an evolved individual) will be subtle. It will be more abstract involvement. Contrast this with arrogance of our time and the attempt to teach ‘freedom for expression’. The world has become very complicated and artists (as also common people who are artists in their own way!!) needs to understand the context in which they function, it is not limitation but challenge.
What we see now is crasser version with specific aim to be controversial and benefits from spin off. We live in morass of the time with market force influence as also media. Catching the public space by whatever means has become an in all (most artists-painters I know at personal level were scoundrels to say the least, so the egalitarians versions of people associated with art is definitely not true nor are they progenies of renaissance). The media for their own reasons will not explore this but most people are very antagonistic about the way market has encroached into their life. So when it comes to Gods they revere it can go out of hand. As a reaction people have become quite vicious in their response which is manipulated by political party and media. Whatever maybe the reason for difference to call for killing someone for transgression is heinous and cause of worry. Hooligans are nobody to decide and should have no space in civilized world.
Coming to Hindu Gods/Goddesses the pictures have a context and stories (some local some mainstream) which most Hindus are aware of. So it is not open for anyone to work on, you are treading on serious repercussion here. Private involvement with God need remain private, the different depiction they are quoting was not meant for market consumption. There is a stampede going on to make private public, and seen as some kind of achievement, maybe but Gods or religious symbols are not private; it is shared by millions of people at a very intimate level. You are taking things out of context for market which will not be tolerated by most people. Also understand we are living in a world of TRPs and political parties so sometimes minor issue can get exploded. Who gets benefits from these controversies need be studied, secular fundamentalists cannot be ruled out.
If people are worked up too much in their arrogance they can very well start their own religion!!. But the symbols revered by millions of people cannot be vandalized, Danish cartoons are unacceptable. Art is subtler form of life. Freedom for expression is not a license for playing with faith and belief of common people and whatever little they have left to revere (one need to understand their insecurities and predicaments in life). This blogger request the Government to have stricter laws in matter of religious symbols/ holy texts of all religion like the one associated with nation state- flag and so on. Western narrations cannot work in this part of the world nor their understanding of secularism that some have got tutored having spent most time in that part of the world and now want to teach us, the arrogance is astounding. It is not about morality but contemporary need. It is not about freezing life but exploring its intricacies and challenges. Evolving is about abstraction and not borrowing images revered by millions as part of faith, soul. Maybe when everyone is enlightened then significance of symbols/God will be understood. Also maybe then there will be realization that life is more abstract; there is less to explore in religious symbols. People have much serious problems that need to be addressed. Mischief is win-win for certain section but for common people it is another burden they can do without.
Post script: I came across these lines in The Kite Runner ‘When you tell a lie, you steal someone’s right to truth. When you cheat, you steal the right to fairness’. How could anyone ever miss a book that has such incredible lines?
religion is a way of understanding and reaching God. I am quite a skeptic of western secularism which tends to draw a line between faith and everything else, reducing religion to isolation or ridiculed into irrational or superstition. It is not at all surprising since in West religion has had history of atrocities on secular activities- the ‘dark ages’ wherein anything that contradicted the religion were prosecuted. Since religion in West did intrude/contradicted the secular, the rational, Renaissance (to some extend even Protestants) was a reaction, an outburst for individuality, an attempt to claim public space, assertion of freedom of expression. Secularism therefore was an attempt to keep religion away from public space. Further as a reaction it became acceptable to ridicule or lampoon religious symbols taken to extreme in the name of freedom of expression.This idea or practice of secularism maybe acceptable in West since it follows their narration but to apply that to other societies is flawed. This alien understanding can be a cause of discontent. Of course there definitely are universal elements like on Truth as also criticizing inhuman practices, upholding sacredness of individual rights which can be trampled even by religion that has no reference point to west (followers of Hinduism did heinous crimes is on record but the religion as such was open to experimentation on ideas and thinking). The Western understanding of secularism does have some of the positives that need to be cherished.
Freedom of Expression defines civilized society. Every individual should have the right to explore life to his/her potential (here it needs to be pointed out that every individual is creative in their own way and that creativity is not confined to certain occupations, to get precedence). Any hindrance to this is curtailing of human rights. However since we live in society it has to work in context, there is a need to strike balance particularly when it is the question of faith. All faith (crystallized as Religion) works at two level: One is symbols that are holy scriptures, places of worships, images of god/holy figures and so on that are venerated. Second is the level that transcends these, spiritual- to put it in words, where one understands meanings beyond these symbols, have an enlightened encompassing faith and so world view. The intention of all religions and great saints is to take humans to this level of understanding. It is a path, it is a process that is very individual. Even in collective participation the change has to be from within.
However despite these egalitarian intentions of Religion most people find it difficult to take the path, it maybe due to various f
actors most prominent being getting into the rut of occupations to survive. Therefore except minuscule percentage of people most very strongly associate with symbols and therefore cause of strife if stifled with. Taking the specific instance of painters (artists who seems to have monopoly over creativity!!) since they have been in controversy in recent times it need be stressed that an evolved artist will have an empathic understanding of predicaments of people vis a vis faith. Therefore he/she will respect the images that are revered by common people. Further if the intention is to explore ideas, truth and so on then an evolved artist (necessarily an evolved individual) will be subtle. It will be more abstract involvement. Contrast this with arrogance of our time and the attempt to teach ‘freedom for expression’. The world has become very complicated and artists (as also common people who are artists in their own way!!) needs to understand the context in which they function, it is not limitation but challenge.What we see now is crasser version with specific aim to be controversial and benefits from spin off. We live in morass of the time with market force influence as also media. Catching the public space by whatever means has become an in all (most artists-painters I know at personal level were scoundrels to say the least, so the egalitarians versions of people associated with art is definitely not true nor are they progenies of renaissance). The media for their own reasons will not explore this but most people are very antagonistic about the way market has encroached into their life. So when it comes to Gods they revere it can go out of hand. As a reaction people have become quite vicious in their response which is manipulated by political party and media. Whatever maybe the reason for difference to call for killing someone for transgression is heinous and cause of worry. Hooligans are nobody to decide and should have no space in civilized world.
Coming to Hindu Gods/Goddesses the pictures have a context and stories (some local some mainstream) which most Hindus are aware of. So it is not open for anyone to work on, you are treading on serious repercussion here. Private involvement with God need remain private, the different depiction they are quoting was not meant for market consumption. There is a stampede going on to make private public, and seen as some kind of achievement, maybe but Gods or religious symbols are not private; it is shared by millions of people at a very intimate level. You are taking things out of context for market which will not be tolerated by most people. Also understand we are living in a world of TRPs and political parties so sometimes minor issue can get exploded. Who gets benefits from these controversies need be studied, secular fundamentalists cannot be ruled out.
If people are worked up too much in their arrogance they can very well start their own religion!!. But the symbols revered by millions of people cannot be vandalized, Danish cartoons are unacceptable. Art is subtler form of life. Freedom for expression is not a license for playing with faith and belief of common people and whatever little they have left to revere (one need to understand their insecurities and predicaments in life). This blogger request the Government to have stricter laws in matter of religious symbols/ holy texts of all religion like the one associated with nation state- flag and so on. Western narrations cannot work in this part of the world nor their understanding of secularism that some have got tutored having spent most time in that part of the world and now want to teach us, the arrogance is astounding. It is not about morality but contemporary need. It is not about freezing life but exploring its intricacies and challenges. Evolving is about abstraction and not borrowing images revered by millions as part of faith, soul. Maybe when everyone is enlightened then significance of symbols/God will be understood. Also maybe then there will be realization that life is more abstract; there is less to explore in religious symbols. People have much serious problems that need to be addressed. Mischief is win-win for certain section but for common people it is another burden they can do without.
Post script: I came across these lines in The Kite Runner ‘When you tell a lie, you steal someone’s right to truth. When you cheat, you steal the right to fairness’. How could anyone ever miss a book that has such incredible lines?
