The Real Lokamanya
“To combat a deadly disease, drastic remedies are required,” said Dr. Ambedkar when some around him wondered if the decision to go to Mahad and drink the water from the Chowdar lake was an “impatient” one. Following the act of Babasahaeb and his comrades of concern, the upper-caste people of Mahad had not just beaten up the Dalits of the village but also performed a ritual to ‘purify’ the Chowdar lake, which according to them had been polluted by the untouchables. Mere education, creation of awareness and exposing the truth of scriptures wouldn’t be sufficient to battle untouchability, opined Ambedkar and decided to launch another Satyagraha at Mahad.
This decision was welcomed and supported by the non-Brahmin leaders Dinkarrao Javalkar and Keshavrao Jede. But the two leaders had a condition for Dr. Ambedkar. They wanted no Brahmin to participate in the proposed conference at Mahad or in the whole of the second phase of Mahad satyagraha. The bitter memory of what had happened in Mahad earlier was probably what prompted Javalkar and Jede to make such a request, and it was not unjustified. Babasaheb strictly said no to the condition put forth by Javalkar and Jede saying “the view that all Brahmins were the enemies of Untouchables was erroneous,” and explained that what he hated was the men who were possessed with the spirit of Brahminism. He added that “a non-Brahmin filled with such ideas of highness and lowness was a repellent” to him as a “Brahmin free from this spirit and sense of these privileges and unjust power” was welcome to him.
The stand taken by Ambedkar, so different from the position of Javalkar and Jede, reflects the worldview of his. In addition, it is possible, it is a glimpse also of his own experiences- shaped by some true allies of anti-caste struggle coming from the Brahmin community. One among them, a close associate of Ambedkar and his fight against Untouchability was Shridhar Balwant Tilak alias Shridharpanth!
Shridharpanth who founded the Pune branch of Samata Samaaj Sangh, an organization started by Ambedkar, and also served as its Vice-President, was the son of Balgangadhar Tilak. “It is a miracle that an Ambedkarite was born in an extremely brahminical set-up,” says Shatrughn Jadhav, author of a book on Shridharpanth and his close association with Ambedkar.
Though it shouldn’t be expected of the children that they always follow the footpath of the parent, the overpowering influence the family environment has on individuals, especially during their formative years, is undeniable. An Ambedkaraite coming out from the Tilak family appears like a miracle, not just because of the influence parental figures have on children, but also because the battle of ideology, and the social-political and legal fights that were happening between the two camps, the conservative Brahmin nationalists, whose idea of a nation was based on a castist idea of a society, and the non-Brahmin warriors of social justice, who envisioned political independence through the lens of social justice.
The intensity of the battle between these two streams can be better understood by having a closer look at the saarvajanik ganeshotsav (collective celebration of Ganesha festival) in Pune.
At the end of the 19th century Sardar Krishanji Kashinath alias Nanasaheb Khajgiwale witnessed the public celebration of Ganesha festival in Gwalior and replicated the same in Pune the next year. Though there was only three public celebrations of Ganesha that year in Pune, the idea captured the imagination of Balagangadhar Tilak who in his Kesari editorial wrote great words of appreciation about the new culture. As a result of this and the calculated and concentrated effort of Tilak around 150 public celebration of Ganesh were held in Pune the next year.
Sarvajanik Ganeshotsav popularized by Tilak has been hailed as a master stroke since it played a role in mobilizing people against the colonial rule. But along with creating a political awareness against the colonial regime, these public celebrations were also used as political tools or weapons against the majority of Indians. This needs a bit of an elaboration. Those days with the blessings of Balagangadhar Tilak a music troupe named Sanmitra Mela, who sang during the Ganesha festival. The songs of the Sanmitra Mel would ridicule and belittle the political opponents of Tilak, namely Gopalkrishna Gokhale, Firoze Shah Mehta, Rajaram Shastri Bhagawat and the song package of Sanmitra Mela also had songs that were anti Dalits and spat venom on girls going to school, and upholding the views of Tilak against girl education. These songs were harming beyond the public celebrations, when children listening to these songs would go to school and repeat them before girls and Dalits. Many of the girls and Dalits finding it humiliating, in addition to other humiliations caused by caste discriminations, opted out of school! This condescending and dehumanizing music culture continued for many years with the blessings of Tilak.
Some years later, as a response to the Sanmitra Mela, under the guidance and leadership of Jede and Javalkar a new music troupe came into existence. The new troupe was called Chatrapati Mela. The songs churned out by the Chatrapati Mela sang the glory of Shivaji, Shahu Maharaj and mainly Phule. The songs also took on themselves to spread the values lived and upheld by these icons and leaders. Also, the songs of Chatrapati Mela critiqued the vision and action of the Tilakites. Javalkar collected these songs and published them as a book under the title Chatrapati Padya Sangrah.
The fight between these two forces got so intense that from mere battle of bands, it got physical when to combat Tilakites formed a vigilante group to tame the Chatrapati Mela. In response to this move by the Tilakites, another group of vigilantes was formed by Jede and Javalkar.
If one is to observe this battle of titans closely, it does seem like a miracle that an Ambedkarite emerged from the house of Tilak!
Shridharpanth, unlike his father Balagangadhar Tilak, held views against untouchability, girl child marriage, shaving the heads of widows, and also worked towards their abolition. This shows how his views and understanding came very close to that of Babasaheb, who in his writings had shown how these very elements – girl child marriage, enforced widowhood, degradation of widows- were at the heart of caste system’s formation. Hence fighting against these matters were essential to the politics of Ambedkar and preaching superficially against untouchability alone wasn’t sufficient to annihilate caste. Shridharpanth shared this dream, and also worked with Ambedkar on the same lines.
Even before coming into contact with Ambedkar, Shridharpanth held progressive opinion and anti-caste views. He would argue with his father saying political freedom and social justice are both important, while his father largely believed that the matters of social justice were a mark of ‘loss of nationality’ and it ‘denationalized’ persons. This deviation of Shridharpanth from the path of his father caused a lot of discomfort among the colleagues and followers of Balagangadhar Tilak.
The discomfort of Tilakites reached its peak because of three reasons. One, the political views of Shridharpanth became sharp after him coming to contact with Ambedkar. After the Dalit students’ conclave in Pune, the young Tilak not just took Ambedkar to Gaikwad-waada of Tilak, this and him starting the Pune branch of Samataa Samaaj Sangh made this friendship and camaraderie very clear and loud. To make it worse, outside the Gaikwad-wada he put a board that read ‘chaturvarnya vidhwamsak samiti’. These became the second reason. To top it all, Shridharpanth organized an inter-caste dining at Gaikwad-wada and invited nearly 200 people from the Untouchable communities, which included many singers and instrumentalists from the Chatrapati Mela. The main guest of this inter-caste dining was none other than Babasaheb Ambedkar. This became an unbearable matter for the Tilakites, majorly those from the Kesari-Marhatta Trust. They sweated quite a bit to stop this inter-caste dining from happening. When all their efforts failed they broke the electric wire and cut the power connection from Gaikwad-wada when the guests were about to arrive. Though this created a small commotion, Shridharpanth handled it calmly. He requested the members and allies of Samaaj Samtaa Sangh to bring in lanterns and lamps from their homes, which they did, and finally the inter-caste dining happened with hundreds of lamps and lanterns providing the necessary illumination.
What followed this was tragic!
The members of the Keasri-Marhatta Trust who were against the property being handed over to Shridharpanth, sketched conspiracy against him and his brother Rambhavu who too was a progressive minded person, and began torturing them psychologically by making a legal move with regard to the ownership of Kesari and Marhatta newspapers and the Trust. The brothers faced a lot of humiliation, ridiculing and harassment from the Trustees who were being supported even by the extended family of Tilak, after Shridharpanth organized the inter-caste dining at Gaikwad-wada. They began speaking lowly of him in public, tarnishing his image and thus creating a public opinion against him. Some relatives of Shridharpanth, the well-meaning ones, unable to see the targetting of brothers, requested them to reconcile with the Tilakites and give up their ideological beliefs. But both the brothers refused to do so.
Probably striking a balance between a tender heart and a sharp mind became difficult for Shridharpanth. Unable to bear the torture of the conservatives, he jumped under a running train and killed himself on the 25th of May in the year 1928. He was just 32 then.
Just before killing himself by suicide, Shridharpanth wrote three letters. One to the the then Collector of Pune, one to the newspapers and one to his friend B.R. Ambedkar. In his letter to Babasaheb he wishes best to the anti-caste struggle, expresses his solidarity with the movement and Samaaj Samtaa Sangh, and in a moving line says he is going ahead in time to let the Almight know about the grievances of his Dalit brothers and sisters.
The day this letter reached him home, Ambedkar was in Jalgao where he first got the news of Shridharpanth’s untimely death. Ambedkar in his obituary to Shridharpanth wrote about how he kept wishing that the news was a false one. But since the news came from the Pune members of the Samaaj Samta Sangh, of which Shridharpanth was the vice-president, the chances of it being a lie was less and Ambedkar had to believe the news and this, he says in his obituary, made his heart heavy with pain. He also speaks about how he immediately saw that it could not be a natural death and was restless to know what had caused the death. On reaching home Babasaheb went to pick up the newspaper to read the details of Shridharpanth’s death and along with newspaper he also found a letter written to him by Shridharpanth. It is said that Ambekar wept on reading the letter by Shridharpanth. In the same obituary Ambedkar holds the conservatives of Pune and the Tilakites responsible for the death of Shridharpanth and also calls his untimely death a great loss not just to Maharashtra but to the whole of India.
Later in the obituary, recollecting how Balagangadhar Tilak spoke dismissively about his paper Mookanaayak, and also about the Dalits, Ambedkar declares that a man like Tilak is not worthy of the title Lokamanya. He says that the ‘loka’ (world) of the so called Lokamanya was casteist and non-inclisive. This was not the case with his son Shridharpanth, says Ambedkar, and declares that Shridharpanth is the real Lokamanya.
(Originally written in Kannada for my fortnightly column daarihoka for the webportal ee-dina)
bell hooks, my friend
bell hooks is no more.
thank you, my friend, for being the friend you have been to this stranger all these days!
yes, bell hooks is a friend though I haven’t met her even once.
It was in the summer of 2019 that I finally picked up the book All About Love after it being there in my personal library for nearly three years then. while reading it I was so deeply touched by every sentence that I just wanted to pick several expressions, phrases, sentences, and passages from the book, hold them by their hand, and kiss them! by centering politics and life around the idea and practice of love and stressing on ‘love ethic’, bell hooks theoretically and intellectually concretized for me a worldview which until then was unconsciously being formed in the same direction under the influence of the words of Shailendar, Paulo Freire, Basavanna, Kabir, Gibran etc.
after reading her All About Love, i quickly picked up Salvation, her second book in the four-book series on love. it made it possible for me to view the world in a very different way since it dealt with black people and love. while reading it, i was constantly engaged with the thought of how one could view the Indian marginalized sections from a similar lens of love. it only humbled me and widened my horizon and made my heart even more tender.
next, i picked up her The Will To Change, and, no exaggeration, while reading this book it did not feel like reading a book. i never thought i would weep reading a non-fiction book, but while reading The Will to Change i wept endlessly like a child, like weeping in therapy sessions. it certainly was therapeutic to an extent. The Will to Change deals with ‘men. masculinity and love’ and it addresses with great depth and more importantly with great compassion and kindness, the pressure of patriarchy on men; an issue that i have been trying to articulate for a long period of time. reading this book, as said earlier, did not feel like reading a book. it felt like making a new friend who heard the silence between my heartbeats, the unvoiced cries within me, and then just put her arms on my shoulder and silently said, “I understand you.”
my friend, your books Communion and Where We Stand remain half-read and stare at me from my bookshelf. there are many more books of yours, my friend, that i wish to read and I will certainly read them and keep you alive in my living of life and in my whole-hearted attempt to practice of love ethic.
bell hooks, my friend, you are the only author other than Galeano whose hand I wished to kiss. it will never be possible. but your arms will always be around my shoulder and in its warmth, I will feel more and more grounded. thank you for being yourself, my friend.
rest in love, bell hooks.
Protected: Reconciliation
Permalink Enter your password to view comments.
Holy Rights: a brave film essaying complex battle for gender rights by Muslim women
Shot and edited between 2016 and 2019, at a time when Hindu fundamentalism in India has tightened its grip on state apparatuses and Islamophobia has evenly spread across the society, Holy Rights by Farha Khatun contextualizes the incredibly complex battle for gender rights by Muslim women.
While the entire Muslim community is under threat, a parallel battle for gender justice and gender equality by Muslim women could turn counterintuitive to their original vision and politics. By capturing and chronicling the complexities of this multiple and parallel battles, without diluting the central vision of gender justice, or forgetting the overarching Islamophobia, Holy Rights emerges as one of the strongest and also one of the most courageous films to be made in current times.
Holy Rights follows Safia Akhtar, a resident of Bhopal, who is one of the first women to become a Qazi (Muslim Clerics, traditionally male, whose verdict is final on issues related to Muslim personal law), in India. She was also at the forefront of the fight to ban instant triple talaq.
Lost in Interpretation
Very early on in the film, we see few women confiding in Safia their personal stories of divorce by instant triple talaq. One woman speaks about how she got separated from her husband after he uttered talaq thrice over the phone. Another lady narrates the humiliating experience of being divorced by her husband on a busy street, followed by the strangers, who had gathered, loudly declaring that the marriage is over now.
To these women, Safia explains what the guidelines for talaq as per Quran are and asks how the male Qazis can overrule the words of Allah and sanction validity to instant triple talaq?
Here we realize not just that the Qazis have misinterpreted or rather mister-interpreted the Quran through their gendered gaze, but also realize it is such occurrences which prompted Safia to undergo the necessary training (along with 30 other women) to become a Qazi.
Safia and her comrades went on to challenge the men within the community, who importantly are male religious heads, and also engaged in a bold battle to demand ban of the non-Quranic and non-Islamic triple talaq, by moving to the Supreme Court and writing to the Government.
Layered and entangled complexities
Right in the middle of the 53-minute long film, there is a defining sequence that reveals the complexities of the matter and also the politics of the film.
This is how the sequence flows:
A religious Safia while about to perform namaaz (prayer), asks the filmmaker, a non-practising Muslim, whether she offers namaaz every day. On hearing the answer in the negative, Safia in a seemingly disappointed tone tells the filmmaker, “galat baat,” (It is wrong) and without stopping there, she repeats, “bahut galat hai” (It is very much wrong) and suggests Farha to take time out of her busy schedule and pray every day.
Cut to…
Safia speaks about a news/rumour in circulation about a Fatwa to be issued expelling her from Islam. Responding to this she asks in an unshaken firm voice, “Who are they to expel anyone from Islam?” Declaring her faith a personal matter between her and “my Allah”, and that she is only following the Quran’s path, Safia announces, “Merely their saying or issuing Fatwa will make no difference. I am Muslim, I love Allah, I fear Allah, and I am following Allah’s path. So I am Muslim.”
Cut to…
Taajul Masjid, Bhopal. An all-woman meeting is held under the banner of Bharateeya Muslim Mahila Andolan. The organizers of the meeting ask the gathered women to introduce themselves and insist they be loud enough to be audible to everyone in the assembly. “We also want you to get rid of your inhibitions, your shyness so that we have the strength to speak to people,” explains Safia. Housewives, girls who dropped out of education after high-school – all introduce themselves. Spelling out the purpose of such an organization and such meetings, which is “to gain knowledge about everything”, Safia reassures them that it is a safe space and the ladies, “should be able to discuss frankly”. As the meeting progresses, she tells the gathering, “The biggest issue with Quran is that it is written in Arabic…”
The spoken words continue but the shot cuts and shifts to an interview Safia is giving to India TV, where she continues with the same sentence…
“… Because of that nobody understands the meaning.” Then she goes on to explain what problems this gives rise to. Whenever women have any problem concerning their marriage, talaq, or property, Safia says, they go to the Qazi or Mufti who are considered the ultimate authority on Islam and are believed to be right, even when they are wrong.
Safiya then elaborates on the struggle she and her comrades of concern are battling: “So we make women aware, and tell what rights they have in Islam. Our Quran speaks of equality, justice, mercy, and wisdom. So our Constitution and our Quran both have the same values. So we want that our law is made as per the Quran. So it is obvious that the country in which we are living and its Parliament will pass that bill. So we have given a letter to the Prime Minister that the draft on this matter should be considered and that our laws should also be codified and we should get the same benefits that our religion provides us.”
Cut to…
Safia and her husband Syed Jalil Akhtar are watching TV while having dinner. They are watching Ravish Kumar’s Prime Time where he speaks on how cow smuggling is being used as a justification for lynching and criminalizing people from the Muslim community. With statistics about lynching and criminalization of Muslims, Ravish Kumar speaks about how after 2014 there has been a rise in Islamophobia and communal violence against Muslims.
This sequence which comes at the centre of the film captures the heart of the struggle of both Safia and the filmmaker. It also brings forth the levels and layers of the battles being fought.
Appropriation and expulsion
At a time in history, when a communal and a fascist regime has declared war against an entire religious community, fighting a parallel battle that locks horns with the people within the community is certainly not easy. It does not just run the risk of the battle being appropriated by the larger political enemy but also of being antagonized within, if not out-casted from the community.
When this battle for the ban of instant triple talaq began, we see in Holy Rights, how certain media houses that have a communal gaze, enthusiastically amplified the voice of Safia. We also see how the gendered gaze of the interpreters of the Quran and their allies found Safia to be a traitor and wanted to expel her from Islam.
The vulnerable section within the community become more vulnerable by the very support they receive. But the women risked the vulnerability of being weaponized by the state and fought for a liberatory political demand.
Fight against power and not for power
When we hear Safia say, “Who are they to expel anyone from Islam,” while responding to the news/rumour about a Fatwa, we realize the depth of Safia’s politics. Even in a moment when she has become the individual target, her question is not “Who are they to expel me?” but “Who are they to expel anyone from Islam?” It is not the kind of privileged feminism that bell hooks warns us against, where the battle is for a share in the power. It is a kind of feminism that bell hooks propagate – a feminist politics driven by a love-ethic formed on the idea of love, justice, and equality. For Safia, the struggle is not just to occupy the male-dominated space of religious leadership, but to liberate the community from the hegemony of patriarchy and its interpretation of the Quran, which is wronging its women.
The larger battle
The film Holy Rights, while documenting this struggle and also participating in this struggle, doesn’t forget the larger battle the community is fighting against communalism and Islamophobia. Though not unaffected completely by the current socio-political scenario, we don’t see (at least in the film) Safia engaging much with it. But the filmmaker has consciously chosen to engage with it by highlighting the issues of lynching, criminalization of Muslims and the violence against them.
To counter the popular narrative about Muslims lacking love for the country, the filmmaker underlines the patriotism among these women by showing them singing “jis desh mein Ganga behati hai” and putting up a play which speaks of Constitution with great respect. We see through this filmed play, how these women locate the rights of Muslim women within the Constitutional values. We see how the women identify themselves as rightful citizens of the country which, at least in its Constitution, guarantees them liberty, equality and justice.
The necessary battle
While engaging in a parallel battle against the male dominance in religious leadership and the wronging of women in the community, Safia and her comrades of concern, also realize the importance of another battle at an individual level among the womenfolk within the community. And they engage in it too. They not only make the women folk aware of their rights as per the Quran and the Constitution but also assist them in finding their voice and strengthening their voices.
Exploring complexities and resisting stereotyping
While showcasing these struggles, which like vortex go deep and turn more intense as one goes deeper, the filmmaker problematizes the struggle and also resists stereotyping at the same time in two extremely significant moments in the film.
At the All India Muslim Personal Law Board Conference held in Kolkata, where the men on stage are speaking about the protection of women’s rights and upholding the Shariah law, the filmmaker moves to the corner where women are seated and puts the mic before them. While some young women initially speak to the filmmaker and critique the Govt’s intention to ban instant triple talaq and defending the custom of instant triple talaq, other women around them first request and then instruct the filmmaker to leave them alone. Some tension is built between the filmmaker and the women gathered on the side-lines of the conference. When the filmmaker tries spelling out that there is a difference between listening to men and women about issues concerning women, a burqa-clad young lady tells the filmmaker in clear English, “Whatever you wish to know is being spoken by the men on stage. Just listen to them and let us also listen.” The filmmaker is then immediately asked to leave the “segregated place”.
While on one hand, this moment shows what Safia at the beginning of the film says about women viewing themselves “through the eyes of the men,” the same moment also punctures the majoritarian and stereotypical view of Muslim women as being submissive and uneducated.
The woman, who initially narrates her experience of getting separated from her husband after he uttered talaq thrice over the phone, is seen in one of the end sequences of the film coming to Qazi Safia with her husband and seeking intervention. Safia explains to the husband that as per Quran instant triple talaq is not valid. The lady’s husband disagrees with Safia and, in a desperate, restless, and slightly vulnerable tone, says, “As it is I have committed a sin by giving talaq. Now I can’t commit another sin by staying with her.” He repeatedly says he cannot agree with Safia’s (miss)-interpretation of the Quran and cannot accept his wife back because he has to “face Islam, face Allah” and that he “cannot go against Islam.”
The words of the husband reveal how deeply the interpretation of the male Qazis and Muftis about the custom of instant triple talaq has been etched in the minds of the members of the community, and how difficult it is for anyone to change it, even though the change is in accordance with the sayings of Quran. At the same time, it also shows how the man who somewhat regrets his decision and action of instant triple talaq (“As it is I have committed a sin by giving a talaq”), now doesn’t want to reunite with his wife, because he subscribes to the interpretation of the Quran by the Qazis. The husband, who otherwise would have reunited with his wife, now sticks to his decision, and goes against his heart because he wants to “face Islam”.
The film exposes how an inhumane custom, which largely harms women, also traps men and with the slight glimpse of the man’s vulnerability and complexity, also punctures the majoritarian and stereotypical view of men and specifically Muslim men.
This aspect is underlined thickly by introducing Safia’s husband Syed Jalil Akhtar, a very tender and supportive partner to Safia.
Safe spaces: making the politics personal
By showing the loving relationship between Safia and Jalil, which undoubtedly adds to the strength of Safia, the film brings forth an argument for the need for safe and loving spaces at a personal level and how it is an essential part of and for politics.
The confession of Jalil Akhtar saying earlier he wasn’t the way he is now, makes one wonder if it is Safia who turned him into what he is or is it the love-bond between them which enabled him to become what he has eventually become. What gets communicated is the strength of love to humanize us and create safe spaces, and also the necessity of safe and loving spaces for us to humanize ourselves and gain strength as individuals.
The necessity to create safe and loving places gets highlighted throughout the film. We see how Safia and her comrades of concern create a safe and loving space for women to meet, bond, share, and organize. We see how this safe and loving space not just enables these women socially and politically, but also by creating an atmosphere for them to let their guard loose, makes it possible for them to express themselves (seen through dancing, singing, and merrymaking) and just be themselves unhesitatingly.
By highlighting this creation of safe spaces and making a case for them, Holy Rights silently reminds us that the collective fight finally is to make the world a safer and healthier space, and it can begin only by creating such small pockets of safe and loving spaces.
What one cannot ignore is how despite the intrusive nature of the camera, Farha still manages to create a safe space where the entire struggle reveals itself in all its complexities. The empathetic and sensitive gaze of Farha, her sympathy for women and their traumas, and the trust she builds with all of them is what creates the required safe space for the film to mediate the politics of the struggles, and also build the politics of the film.
If Safia and her husband’s relationship establishes a safe space for feminist politics, and the relationship between the women demonstrate the safe space for feminist praxis, then Farha’s craft exhibits the safe space of filmmaking for a kind of honest internal critique and solidarity amongst Muslim women, and the film as a cultural product aspires to create a safe space where an honest introspection could possibly occur.
It is only in such safe spaces that a religious Safia and a non-practising Muslim filmmaker Farha can come together, befriend each other, and become a part of the essential political action geared towards creating a healthy and safe space for all.
Through this, the film Holy Rights also tells us how for political action and social change, solidarity and political consciousness by itself isn’t enough. They have to be supported by a culture of love. The film also speaks how a political battle for equality cannot be fought overlooking the social battles and that the social battles cannot be fought overlooking the security of individual rights and building safe and loving spaces for individuals.
But then, as the final shot of the film says, at one level, these battles can feel lonely at times. However, the battle is also to fight political and personal loneliness.
(This article was originally published in TwoCircles.Net on 17 Feb 2021)
From Speaking Silence to the Poetry of the Unuttered
I must begin by confessing I am not an official student of Pattabhirama Somayaji (Pattabhi from here on), meaning I haven’t been his classroom student. Yet, I do consider him my teacher and me his student. I doubt if anyone who comes in contact with Pattabhi can escape being his student, for everyone who crosses paths with him will have their horizon widened.
Pattabhi and silence
It was mid-April of 2006. A solidarity protest held in Udupi, in support of the hunger strike that Medha Pathkar had undertaken in Gujarat. By the time I, still a PG student then, reached the spot- outside of the the then Taluq Office, Udupi- after classes, the solidarity event had already begun. It was the first-ever protest I took part in, and I was not familiar with many of them who had gathered there, except a couple of them. As I joined the gathering, one of the senior activists who I knew, said, “I am glad you came,” and then pointing at a man in a long kurta, seated amidst the protestors, continued, “Pattabhi spoke just before you arrived. You missed it.”
Throughout the solidarity event that evening, I kept seeing how Pattabhi was being respectfully greeted by everyone who joined us eventually, and everyone who greeted him got a wordless charming warm smile in return. The silence, I could sense, wasn’t silent. I found that non-silent silence extremely intriguing. When the solidarity gathering came to an end that evening, someone who I held in respect back then said, “Come let me introduce you to Pattabhi”, and I excitedly followed the man. Pattabhi was standing in a corner and smoking a cigarette. When introduced, Pattabhi just raised his hand, with the burning cigarette between his fingers, exhaled the smoke, and just smiled without uttering a single word.
That is how I got introduced to Pattabhi and his defining non-silent silence and his charming warm smile.
Pattabhi and minimalism of spoken-words
It was a long long evening in Sagara at the residence of Vrinda and PV Subraya. The latter was Pattabhi’s college-mate in Mysore. By this time Pattabhi and I had become friends who exchanged texts occasionally. As soon as a senior friend and I reached PV Subraya and Vrinda’s place, Pattabhi keeping aside his glass of whisky, welcomed us with a warm embrace.
That evening, my senior friend, who was a former colleague of PV Subraya, narrated the story of an unrealized dream. When working in Sagara, our friend, wanted to build a small hut in the backyard of PVS and Vrinda’s house and live a humble life. Prior to the teaching job at Sagara, the friend had worked in Jharkhand with a documentary filmmaker and worked in the midst of the aboriginals there. Expectations and pressure from the family had compelled him to quit the life of an explorer and take up a job in Sagara. There he wished to live a minimalist life, in a hut. But within a year, he had to leave Sagara for a job he got in Manipal. Narrating all of this our friend very emotionally said, “I took up the job unwillingly. But I am happy that I have been able to take arts and ideas into this otherwise corporate setup. I have been trying to churn thoughts and dialogues on issues that matter in this otherwise indifferent setup. I am not satisfied, but I am happy that I am able to do these.”
Listening to all of these patiently with his legs crossed and his index finger on his mouth, Pattabhi, without any hesitation and yet without any condescension, said, “It is good that you are doing this job of sensitizing blindfolded people. But, what is the state of the hut?” He said nothing more. Even we had nothing to say after listening to his minimalistic response.
This conversation has always stood as an example of Pattabhi’s silence and also his quality of not mincing words and not wasting words.
Pattabhi’s speeches & lectures
When I joined The Hindu (Mangalore office) as a reporter, in 2008, one of the initial assignments I had was to cover a protest meet, where Pattabhi was also present. The protest wasn’t held by the organization which Pattabhi identified himself with. The organizers had prioritized speakers from their organization. A reporter who stood next to me, who did not know of my friendship with Pattabhi, getting impatient with the on-going speeches, said in frustration, “Why are they not handing over the mic to Prof Pattabhi?” I looked at the reporter with surprise. A reporter waiting for the speech of a particular person at a protest and getting angry over the delay of the speech, said so much about the street speeches of Pattabhi. Acting naïve, I asked the reporter, why was he waiting for the speech of Prof Pattabhi and I clearly remember him telling me, “At such protests, almost everyone speaks the same stuff and most of them are predictable. But he is someone who brings in a new perspective and brings in fresh thoughts and insights.”
During my tenure with The Hindu, Mangalore, for professional reasons I had to interact closely with the the then students of Pattabhi. This was in 2009, after the infamous attack on women at a pub in Mangalore. Following the attack which brought the national media’s attention to Mangalore, several protests were being held and Pattabhi was making several furious speeches. One of his statements to a TV channel irked the members of ABVP in the college he was teaching and those students went on strike demanding the expulsion of Pattabhi. When I went to report this occurrence, the students of ABVP mistook the name of the newspaper I was working for as a pro-Hindutva paper. They not just told me how they were backed by “higher-ups in the party” to protest against Pattabhi but also confessed to me that most of the times in class they instigate Pattabhi to speak of “controversial subjects” that are “political” in nature. Even the protesting students, backed by the VHP and BJP, considering me a friend (since I worked for HINDU paper) told me that though they would get irked by the statements Pattabhi would make in class and disagree with his politics, they still consider him to be, “a good teacher and an extremely knowledgeable person.” At the same time, I was also speaking with the students who stood in support of Pattabhi and against the ABVP students. These bunch of students who knew me for my political and ideological leanings would tell me at length about the lectures of Pattabhi and I can strongly remember some of them telling me how Pattabhi showed more interest in them getting an education than their family members. “It is not just his affection but also the kind of issues he addresses in class and the way he looks at and analyses literature which instils strength in us, grounds us,” one girl had told me.
On evenings when I would be relieved from the office of The Hindu a bit early, I would go meet Pattabhi at his residence. The nature of daily reporting did not allow me to engage with the kind of reading and writing which stimulated me. The easiest way of compensating for all of it was to spend some time with Pattabhi. It is during these informal sessions where Pattabhi and my bonding strengthened.
On such evenings, I got to hear Pattabhi at length. Those were neither street speeches, nor class lectures. Yet they were both and more. If Pattabhi’s street speeches were filled with insights and interpretations, like a literary class, his literary classes were marked by political consciousness, like street speeches. The same was a part of personal conversations in private spaces too. In strange ways the political, the personal, and professional came together in Pattabhi and not just became one but went beyond all the boundaries.
Pattabhi and anger
You are not a friend to Pattabhi, if you have not been subjected to his anger; anger which is not an outburst but anger which boils like water, with bubbling expressions in language, and then cooling down over time.
“Please bear my cross with you,” once came an SMS from him. Who fights so gracefully and artistically?- I had wondered!
Once Pattabhi and another senior friend of mine had a disagreement and the conflict went on for long. It was a difficult situation for people like me who were younger to both and held both in great respect and affection. Pattabhi those days would repeatedly make obvious his anger towards the other senior friend of mine. Probably it was his child-like notorious way of testing my loyalty. I don’t know. So he would refer to the other senior friend as “dushTa” (evil). Once when I mentioned this to another friend of my age group, he very playfully asked why Pattabhi was being so decent even in his rage. Until he mentioned it in a joking manner it hadn’t occurred to me that even in his anger Pattabhi was maintaining a dignity of language!
The same fight between titans continued for some more time and it angered me more because I had failed to bridge the gap between two senior friends of mine. Also, I felt some of Pattabhi’s anger, triggered by his fight with the other senior friend, was being displaced on me. I was hurt by it to an extent. When I confronted him with this complaint, Pattabhi in his signature style, said, “You are holding him on your head (an expression in Kannada equivalent to ‘putting someone on a pedestal). So when I spit at him (a Kannada expression for verbally expressing anger), a bit of it falls on you too. If you wish to escape it, you must not carry him on your head.” I was floored by the image he brought in! There were metaphors even in angry expressions! For a moment I forgot everything and marveled at the literariness of that expression.
As much as I have respected Pattabhi for always having a space to fight with him, and for him to fight with his dear ones, I have equally respected him for the way he fights with his friends without abusing the language. It only shows how language is such an important tool for Pattabhi and knowing its strength and its power, he doesn’t want to mishandle the tool, even in a fit of anger!
Pattabhi’s poetry
Having tried to map Pattahi through shades of his communication, I must confess, in the end now that I have always struggled to decipher his Avant-guard poems. Jokingly I have said some of my friends that when Pattabhi writes poems in English, I feel I do not know English and when he writes in Kananda, I feel I do not know Kannada. Maybe, along with English and Kannada, I also do not know poetry. Possible. But I have always believed that his poems, which I cannot say I have understood in its entirety, is another extreme of his loaded silences, and I cannot but have my jaws dropped at the poetry that is not just an excellent play of words but also says more through the unsaid than the said.
Pattabhi’s range between speaking silence and poetry of the unuttered is just amazing!
Conclusion
When requested to write for this volume, I initially wanted to write about the loneliness of Pattabhi, drawing the title from Arundhati Roy’s essay on Noam Chomsky. In the intended essay, I wanted to explore the political, literary, and emotional aloneness of Pattabhi. Probably it is the fate of the unconventional and those who are above and beyond the set frame-works to end up being left alone, like an island in an ocean. That was about his political and literary loneliness. But what has always haunted me is his emotional loneliness and have never dared to speak of. When I started to write the intended essay, I found myself trying to explore and understand- through writing- the emotional loneliness of Pattabhi, more than the other- political and literary- loneliness of his. Not just because I wasn’t sure if my understanding is right, but also because of some inexplicable reason, I abandoned that essay and began to write this. But the attempt to write the intended essay made me realize that Pattabhi for me has been more of an emotional connection than being just a comrade of concern or guiding light in literary sensibility. Now, that emotional connection can be best explained only through silence or probably by the unuttered in the spoken.
I have not just admired Pattabhi in all these years, I have also had severe fights with him, disagreed with him and his actions. I have felt he is wrong on some occasions and has seen how he has been wronged on some other occasions. All shades of emotions have colored my relationship with Pattabhi, but the constant undercurrent always has been that of love. Probably it is only love which makes space for togetherness with disagreements, and acceptance of humans with all their flaws and shortcomings.
***
Article written for oDalu: oDanaaDigala oDalaaLa, a festschrift for Prof. Pattabhirama Somayaji ideated and edited by Rajalakshmi Narasajjan with the assistance of Shareef Salethur.
Pattabhi is retiring on the 31st of this month.
Protected: Around ‘Self-Care’
Permalink Enter your password to view comments.
On Sonia Gandhi and Arnab Goswami
If at all Sonia Gandhi was the kind to attack those who speak against her or speak rubbish about her, she must have attacked innumerable tom dick and harry in this country from the big actors to the small actors of history. This country has been terribly unfair and unkind to her all through.
In a country which considers people born in this very country as ‘outsiders’ for their identity, what chance did Sonia Gandhi ever have to get any respect or acceptance by the countrymen?
Arnab is just an amplified verbose version of the “common sense” of many in this country. Yeah, his capacity to spread the stupidity cannot be underestimated. We know what was the general opinion average Indians had about Sonia, even before Arnab became a sensation and occupied screen-space.
No matter how much she was hated for no fault of hers or for no reason at all, Sonia Gandhi always conducted herself in a dignified manner.
Let us not dismiss or ignore the flaws and mistakes of and by the Congress, but let us also not forget the contribution Sonia Gandhi made from behind the screens, in the interest of this country and its people. They might not be revolutionary contributions. Yet were significant and despite all their limitations, were still in the interest of the people.
Sonia Gandhi was not motivated to do the work she did by a desire for power. Else why would she refuse to become the PM? Or continue to work even after letting go the chance to become the PM? Twice that too. There is something else that drives her. Call it patriotism or compassion or just a sense of duty, if you wish. The fact that not even once did she move away from taking up responsibility and performing her duty as best understood by her, despite the amount of hatred she received, actually says a lot. To not recognize that is still okay. But to demonize her left right center for no reason; that is unjustifiable.
***
Arnab, I am sorry if someone attacked you. I dont think you deserved it or you invited it. Partially because I dont trust you (because you are not trustworthy and not because I have trust issues) but more importantly because attack of any kind on anyone, I believe, is wrong. Having said that and condemning the “attack” on you, I just request you to pause and think for a while if any of the two is possible for you; to pause or to think. I urge you to pause and think how it feels to be ‘attacked’. If you can pause and think for a while, and through that understanding if you can understand how others who you have attacked and those who feel attacked feel when they feel so, may be you will be able to liberate yourself from yourself. I am sure it is difficult to carry the you that you have become and that would require you to “attack” and destroy any human side to you that breathes within you. Please stop that attack on yourself. Liberate yourself from yourself. Trust me you will feel light and better. And so will the nation.
When Mother’s Milk Becomes Poison and Kills
Few days ago I translated a note written by my friend Kuntady Nitesh about his friend (a Hindu) being asked to vacate the house by the landlord for not participating in the 9 PM 9 Minutes performance, and posted on my Facebook timeline. The purpose was to make the non-Kannada speaking/ reading but English reading fellow humans know of such an inhumane incident. Not surprisingly, when it found circulation on FB, it invited comments from people who are not on my friend’s list too. Most of these comments expressed anger and disgust and for long there came no comment which either dismissed the whole thing or questioned it. Late that night a comment by a girl (a Hindu) was a bit unclear. She typed something on the lines of “Mother asked to shift to rented. What can I say?” and I couldn’t understand what was she trying to say. I asked her what she meant and she in her reply she, even if not in the same words, said, “I refused to participate in this lamp lighting and my mother asked me to look for a rented place. My own mother. What can I tell this man whose landlord has asked him to vacate?” My mind went numb as I read that. My eyes refused to move away from that comment. I took time to type a reply as I was struggling for words. When I finally gathered some words and formed a reply trying to tell her I understood her pain, even if not in the intensity she would be feeling it, and typed it, I couldn’t post the comment. The girl had deleted her comment by then.
Later when I spoke of this to a senior friend she told me that her daughter’s friend faced the same consequence at her place for not participating in the light and sound shows of Sunday!
A 12th century Kannada saint-poet in one of his verses asks, “When mother’s milk becomes poison and kills Who do you complain to…?” Mothers abandoning their children is just a micro image of the motherland abandoning an entire community.
Illustration by the inimitable Mir Suhail
Couple of days ago another senior friend (a Muslim) put up a small note on FB saying her daughter now is convinced that they will all end up in the concentration camp. The note was removed by my friend in a few hours, which I can understand. Few months ago couple of my friends (both practicing and non practicing Muslims) telling me about their family members and relatives having nightmares about concentration camps, which made me feel ashamed as a fellow-human. Fear seeping into the subconscious and erupting as nightmares is one thing but fear gripping your conscious mind is one thing and convincing you that you will be hunted, that too by the state, is another thing. The note by senior friend troubled me quite a lot because theirs is a well educated family and also has members who serve in the judiciary system. If someone from that family has to lose faith in every system and be convinced that they will end up in concentration camp, I don’t know what is left to crumble anymore in this secular democracy.
A tweet by a friend (a skeptic Muslim) couple of days ago, spoke of how she has been fearing death and losing family and friends to Corona and even in the midst of these fears, when she wakes up at night what fills her is with dread are thoughts of how Muslims will be hounded after this is over.
It is heartbreaking to realize that someone is able to imagine the world surviving this pandemic for which there is no vaccine that has been invented yet, but still is not able to imagine a sane society, a secure society, a secular society in the land which takes great pride in saying it is the land which said and apparently believed “vasudaiva kutumbakham,” to mean “the entire world is a family.”
Couple of hours before I began to write this note, a release by the Tahsheeldar of the Krishnarajapete Taluk, Karnataka began circulating over social media. The release speaks of an incident that took place at Tendekere of KR Pete taluk on the 8th of April at 22:45 hrs. Three men were stopped at the check-post and when stopped they have fled after announcing that they “are Muslims and Corona infected,” and threatening to “spread the virus and kill,” in case any attempt is made to catch hold of them. Investigation revealed the three as Mahesh, Abhishekh and Srinivas on whom FIR has been lodged! In the release. the Tahshildar says, “The three lied just to escape the consequences and there was no malicious intention behind it,” after which he says, “In the taluk of KR Pete no Muslim youngsters have arrived to spread the virus,” and adds, “Muslim community is not spreading this disease, it is untrue, hence all are requested to not to get anxious over it.” The release, in its concluding lines appeals the citizens of all religion to live in harmony “like always” and cooperate in fighting Corona.
I am willing to believe that the three men “lied” only to “escape the consequences,” for breaking the rules of lockdown. All of us do lie when we fear consequences. We do not do it consciously but as a reflex. I understand. But I cant square the circle as to why would they say they are Muslims and Corona infected,” and not just “Corona infected,” for escaping consequences. If at all we are to believe that the three did whatever they did just as a reflex action to escape consequences, then it is to be believed that the bias against Muslims, hatred against the entire community has become so internalized that it is now a part of the muscle memory!
If this is the kind of country/ world that we have to live in, what is the point of fighting this pandemic? If we are not able to re-imagine a humanitarian society, re-evaluate ourselves, when being reduced to just biological beings during pandemic with death staring at us, why are we, as a nation, as a society, even fighting for survival?
Between Death and Hatred
In continuation of the battle against CAA-NRC-NPR, we (a group that is united to uphold constitutional values and communal harmony) were planning to have a workshop today in Udupi, a small town in coastal Karnataka. The purpose of the workshop was to train a bunch of trainers in who could go later meet the communities at the block level and educate them about NPR and also to help strategize on how to resist NPR.
On the 18th when the DC imposed section 144 in the district, to fight the spread of Coronavirus, an emergency meeting was called where the core committee of the group met. Majority of them at the meeting said they believed the imposition of section 144 was to diffuse the protests. So they were all of the opinion that we should go ahead and conduct the workshop as planned, for 100-150 people.
Shocked by this, I raised objection and said the threat of virus spread shouldn’t be taken lightly and we should postpone the workshop for the time being. Some (largely ladies) agreed with me and suggested we cancel the workshop for now. But still a majority felt that as warriors who are out on a mission and have already begun to fight the Government, shouldn’t care for anything and just continue the battle. They began to call legal experts and take opinion on what would be the implications of not bending to the imposition of section 144. I urged all to not consult a legal expert but medical experts. Thankfully the one presiding the meeting felt the need to consult a medical expert and made a call to one medical expert who strictly advised against any gathering for whatever purpose. Though not happy to listen to it, quite a few gave up on insisting that we go ahead with the workshop. Yet not all were convinced. The one presiding over the meeting said, “I dont see the Government going ahead with NPR by putting the lives of teachers at risk for the collection of data.”
At this point one senior Muslim man said, “I realize that there is a serious medical threat. We can take some precautions for that while conducting the workshop. I feel the Government is quite cunning. They will impose 144 and create panic till the day before NPR data collection is to begin and then will go ahead with their own plan and complete the process of NPR. If teachers do not cooperate they might hire the cadres of RSS and do it,” and asked, “if such a thing is to happen, what are we to do?”
I froze. It seemed like this man, heart in heart believes, the Government is more cruel than the pandemic. An interpretative reading of his words make me realize that for him either God or science will come to our rescue if infected by the virus. But there is nothing that can save us from this Government other than our fight against it, however bleak the chances of our protests triumphing in this battle. To stretch it a bit further- even God cant save us from this Government!
Also, his words reflected how his mind could be asking him as to what the point of surviving a pandemic would be if in the end one is to lose their home(land)? Though I continued to argue till the end of the meeting that at this point we should prioritize our safety, I am still feeling guilty about my privileged position which can clearly, whether right or wrong, prioritize safety over security, while people like the senior Muslim man who spoke, cannot make such prioritization. If there is no assurance of a life of dignity and equality, what is the point of such a life? – his words question. Hence he is ready to take a risk with Coronovirus, but is not ready to take any chance with the poisonous Government which is determined to show people like him their place, as per the new vision of the nation revised by the forces behind the Government.
There was a message that kept circulating on whatsapp few days ago which read: samajh mein nahi aa raha, naagarikta bachaaye, khaata bachaaye ya jaan bachaaye!
It certainly is easy to make sense of death than to make sense of hatred.
Anxiously Anticipating The Darkest Times
The real dark times are yet to begin. The stage is set already, it appears to me.
We are at a point of history where we, as a country, have the highest number of youths in comparison to any other phase of Independent India’s history.
While it is overwhelming to see so many youths, especially students, hit the streets to resist and protest against CAA-NCR-NPR, it is unrealistic and too much of a romanticism to believe this mobilization, this resistance and protest will bear fruits.
On the 26th of Jan the Hyderabad edition of ToI had a public notice issued by the SBI which said the customers are expected to provide with the documents/ information they have listed which includes also “Letter issued by NPR.” The public notice also says, “Bank may be constrained to freeze accounts… if the above documents are not provided.”
NPR demands ones’ aadhaar, DL, ration card, passport and also bank details. Come April arm twisting begins and with Banks threatening to freeze accounts and the possibility of other institutes following the same steps will leave the masses singing “kaagaz nahi dikhaayengey,” mocked, ridiculed and also dismissed. How many, including me, would go on saying, “kaagaz nahi dikhaayengey” and for how long, when being arm twisted through freezing of bank accounts, cancellation of passport, struck off from the voters list etc.?
The chances of the Supreme Court giving a verdict against the CAA is unlikely. While it can be argued that even if the SC doesn’t uphold the constitution, the protests must continue, it is only right to ask sincerely as to how many among the mobilized will continue to fight even after being let down by the SC, given the fact that many among the protesters are first timers.
A large number of protesters have been youths and most of them are students and have come out on the streets for the first time to fight for a cause, which is certainly is a reassuring matter. But these fine minds and spirits rebellious, I fear, will be majorly disillusioned and disappointed when the arm twisting for NPR would begin and when the SC will let us down. Also, to slowly see a good number of comrades of concern withdraw, under the pressure of the circumstances, will not be an easy thing to digest and it certainly will leave a lot of youngsters feel more disillusioned and disappointed. In the end to see all the energy, enthusiasm, rightness, mobilization, hope and dream be crushed will be an immensely demoralizing impact on the fine young minds who are risking a lot in this battle of the right against the might.
The RSS has destroyed a major section of the youths by poisoning their minds with their ideology, a great reflection of which is Gopal Sharma who fired at the protesters near Jamia few days ago and Kapil who fired at Shaheen Bagh. Imagine how many youths who otherwise could have been a great asset to the world and contribute to its well being in several ways, have been turned into venom spitting destructive beings like Gopal Sharma and Kapil! Now if this great mobilization and mass movement against CAA-NCR-NPR ends up causing disillusionment to another major set of youths, it would literally mean the nation, the society having lost a major energy of an entire generation. I dont know what the next several years are going to be life for this society, for this country if that is to happen! That, if happens, I think will be the darkest of times.
Gopal Sharma and Kapil must have been a different people altogether before they got poisoned by the ideology which is poisoning the nation. They would have been different human beings had they not been poisoned by the ideology that is poisoning the nation. So many youngsters this country this society has lost, thanks to the poisonous RSS. Now, I fear, many more young minds getting eroded in this fight against the RSS. If we do not tackle this, somehow, the last laugh will be that of the RSS and worse, a good number of years will be lost with the losing of young minds and youthful energy.
I pray, all my fears mentioned above will be proven wrong by history. But I feel, may be we should collectively begin to think how to deal with the situation if at all it comes to being.
Crazy Mind's Eye 