HT Home / Blogs Home >
They Call Me Muslim / Religion, World / With a little malice towards Khushwant
With a little malice towards Khushwant
A missed Khushwant Singh column does to me all that a missed Khushwant Singh column can do. It makes my Sundays dreary.
Thankfully, most newspapers – metropolitan and regional – carry his ‘malice…’ column. So, wherever your travel takes you, Khushwant Singh’s malice is sure to follow you in right there: Hyderabad, Guwahati, Bhubaneswar or Mumbai.
There was a time when I used to edit Khushwant Singh’s ‘malice’ column for HT. Of course, one never had to rewrite his manuscripts for clarity, as is the case with many writers. That was never going to be the case.
Occasionally, a line had to be shortened or added, or a word lopped off so that the piece fitted in. This was always tricky. A shoddy editing job could turn a piece into a mutilated masterpiece. My editor trusted me to do this job.
I was aware that Singh was ripe old. At that age, mental faculties tend to wilt, the brain actually shrinks in size and most people lose the ability to do things accurately. Therefore, I would closely read through the manuscript, but without much success at finding even typos. Very rarely would Khushwant Singh miss a comma.
The manuscript would come with catchphrases, but never with a complete headline. So, my job was to think hard of what headline to give. Should it be profane, or witty or even flirty as Khushwant Singh often is? Ultimately, the content dictated the headline’s tone and tenor.
I would also look for appropriate pictures to go with the ‘malice’ column. It was a job I loved and now miss, having moved on to doing something far more tricky – fighting Islamophobia, writing on minority issues and what it means to be a Muslim today.
Once, Khushwant Singh expressed a wish to meet the person who handled his column at the Hindustan Times, whose editor he was many years ago. I was very excited. So, one wintry Delhi evening, Sushmita Bose, a colleague, and I landed up at his ground floor pad at Sujan Singh Park, dot at the top of the hour.
Khushwant Singh was – expectedly – downing pegs of Scotch and nibbling off a rind of fine cheese, with his son for company. He reached for Sushmita’s hand, kissed it and got talking. Of course, Sushmita, the only woman among us, got most of the attention.
Khushwant Singh told me that he was happy to see young Muslims take up journalism.
Khushwant Singh is perhaps the only contemporary newspaper columnist who writes not so much with the intention of violently moulding public opinion but to entertain, apprise and hold the mirror up. Yet, his writings are unsurpassed in their abiding popularity.
His pen is so homespun, anecdotal and easy-going. It can be caustic without the rage, provoking without the jab and insightful without being condescending.
I sometimes wonder why some of our present-day columnists – the Barkha Dutts, the Sagarika Ghoses or Shekhar Guptas – don’t take a leaf out of him, be less hectoring but more engaging?
Such lavish praise of Khushwant may cause you to suspect that I am up to something sinister. You might say, halal se pehle, bakre se mohabbat, Zia?
This Sunday’s ‘with malice towards one and all’ ruminates about the state of Pakistan, and rightly so. Every other day, there are bomb blasts in Pakistan, he says. No one is sure why Muslims are killing Muslims. The mullahs seem to be extending their influence. So on and so forth.
Khushwant Singh then focuses on the state of Pakistan’s women. He rues that more and more women are taking to burqas. A community that confines half its population in purdah cannot succeed, he writes. Male chauvinism was on the rise.
To the extent of confining women and keeping them from exploring their options, I agree with Khushwant Singh. But Pakistan descending into intractable chaos and purdah putting fetters on women are half truths.
Sometimes, Pakistan’s assessment is unfairly harsh. There is a thriving body of civil society members who are attempting to reconcile liberalism and Islam. Sometime after 9/11, when a delegation of reputed Pakistanis was invited to Delhi, I met some of them. I met a young lady from Swat, a lawyer, who has been a powerful voice against extremists there.
I had long chats with Asma Jahangir and Jugnu Mohsin. Sherry Rahman, a Pakistani parliamentarian, is the bravest of Pakistani women. One could read up this great piece on the Christian Science Monitor on Sherry. It is temptingly titled thus: “Could there be a liberal Pakistan? Sherry Rehman says she’s working on it.”
Purdah isn’t confined to Pakistan, as Khushwant Singh points out. It is practised in most of India, by Hindu, Sikhs, Muslims and Jains alike. In traditional bania families, women, especially daughters-in-law, seldom go out without covering their faces with the long end of their saaris. I find it ridiculous when people associate purdah with Islam.
Islam and liberalism, as philosophical systems, are largely mutually exclusive and competitive. But there is evidence that the two are reconcilable. Women like Sherry Rehman or Asma Jahangir are proof of this. Of course, some of them may not be willing to raise their hands for Khushwant Singh to hold and to kiss.
(41 votes, average: 2.54 out of 5)
Loading ...
tajender Reply:
July 3rd, 2011 at 8:36 pm
nair gopi why u dont come here now with great 7th century ideas,i wait for u,when i was in school i was taught a story on MEERA BAI,WHICH I NARRATE HERE which shows hindu idea on women,
——————————————————————————–
Meera murdered by vaidik Brahmins for disobeying their order
For the first time in known history, Budha initiated a woman, Ambapali, in Dhamma Order. After that for 2,000 years not a single woman (except Sanghmitra, daughter of Emperor Ashok) could enter the domain of Dhamma preachers. It is very perplexing that after a whopping period of 2,000 years, it was only Guru Ravidas who dared to initiate a woman (Meera) to the path of Dhamma preaching.
The life story of Meera, as taught in school books, tells that at the age of 4-5, she decided to marry a Brahmanic god, Krishna. But when she grew up, she was married off to one Bhoj, brother of an infamous Rana. But soon she became widow. Then she set out in quest of god Krishna.
RANA’S CRUELTIES
Rana annoyed with her love for Krishna, made several attempts to kill her but with the grace of her Giridhar, she survived. Fed up of Rana’s cruelties, she left home and reached Dwarka. Rana sent his Brahmans emissaries to bring her back. One evening they found her in a temple. Next morning, the Brahmans showed the odhani i.e. mantle of Meera, to the devotees and declared that she has “penetrated” into the idol of Krishna.
A simple perusal of this **** and bull story reveals that it is nothing but a cold blooded murder.
The reasons are:
(1). No devotee of any stature could ever enter the idol of any god — leave alone a small creature like Meera. Even Sankaracharya, the “supreme saint of Brahmanism”, could not put even nail of his little finger into any of his gods’ idols.
(2). After the event of “penetration”, the physical appearance, life of Meera ended.
(3). Only three things can bring death : i) age (natural death), ii) self ( suicide) and iii) others (homicide- murder or accident). The death to Meera did not come because of these three factors. Hence she did not die a natural death. We find no mention that she committed suicide or that she met with an accident.
(4). No book or story mentions the place where she died, where her funeral rites were held, who lit her pyre, who immersed her ashes into which river etc. It proves that no such thing happened with Meera.
In other words the Brahmins not only brutally murdered her but also disposed of her body without performing any rites.
(5). The Brahmins have the right to commit such an act as per their sacred scripture which declares that as agni does not acquire any sin for burning innocent people. So too the Brahmin acquires no sin for doing any sinful act. Hence what ‘sins’ those sin-proof Brahmins committed to Meera for whole night, is anybody’s guess.
MURDER PERMITTED
(6). The history of Brahminism is testimony to the fact that they murdered anybody and everybody who challenged their supremacy. Even their supreme god Vishnu was kicked by the Brahmin for not doing Namaste. Right from Vritar, Nahush, Ravana, Charvak, Moglanya, Vrihdarth to Guru Ravidas and Meera, the list of their victims is endless. If Parshu, the Brahmin, could commit wholesale genocide of Kshtriyas, what resistance tiny Meera could pose before their mafia might?
(7). A child at the age of 4-5 years cannot take ‘decision’ or ‘pledge’ to marry a particular person. We find no mention in her entire volume of writings that she ever pledged to marry Krishna. Nor do we find any mention that she resisted marrying Bhoj. So the story of her promise to marry Krishna is also bogus. More so a god is always treated as ‘Father’ and never as ‘husband’ or sex partner.
(8). Among Rajputs (clan of Meera & Rana) worshipping the Brahminic god Krishna is not a sin and nor a crime that attracts capital punishment. There were and are thousands of Rajputanis who revere Krishna. We find no mention that of any of other women being persecuted on this plea.
CRIMES OF MEERA
(9). Rather her ‘love’ for Krishna was way of advertisement for Brahmins to increase their income from Rajput families. Hence ‘Krishna’ could never be reason for annoyance to Rana or his master :Brahmins.
Hence the real question is : What ‘crime’ did Meera commit that the Brahmins had no choice but to eliminate her? The series of her ‘crime’ include :
(1). In a clan where a widow was bound to be burnt alive with her husband’s corpse, Meera defied this ‘holy rule’. It was not less than a revolt/coup. She even did not get her head tonsured.
(2). Not only she defied this ‘holy rule’, she also challenged the supremacy of Brahmins who made this rule. Her bani is testimony to this fact.
(3). She did not stop there. She went to the extent of denouncing all Brahminic rituals and dogmas, their scriptures, places of worship, gods and all. She called them matlab ke garji i.e. wretched selfish beings.
(4). The last nail on her coffin proved to be her association with Guru Ravidas who baptized her in Sharman Dhamma. From her writings it appears she took asylum with Guru Ravidas after revolting against the holy rule of sati.
(5). After joining Guru Ravidas’ Dhamma, she invited him to her native place. She offered him greater respect than to the Brahmins. This infuriated them to such an extent that they murdered Guru Ravidas on the spot. However, Meera escaped momentarily.
(6). The most stunning part of her writings is the fact that she described Guru Ravidas as her ‘Giridhar Nagar’ (saint from city) ‘Gobind’ (god) ‘Bhagwan’ (god) ‘Priytam (dearest) ‘Bhedna (secret sharer), Swami (master).
SAINT-SOLDIER OF RAVIDAS
Hence, defiance of Brahmins, Brahmanism and reverence of an Untouchable was the reason for her brutal murder.
The distorted life and struggle of Meera is one of the innumerable examples; how Brahmins can distort facts and history. She denounced all Brahminic gods, avtars including Krishna as worthless. But the whole world is made to believe that she loved and worshipped Krishna. Her Giridhar is made synonym of Krishna. If synonymous names could be basis for declaring ‘Giridhar Nagar’ to be ‘Giridhar Krishna’; should we call all persons having name as Dashrath as fathers of Ram. Or all Arjun named persons as jija (husband of sister) of Giridhar Krishna.
Meera was a soldier in the army of saint-soldier Ravidas who raided castles of Brahminism. Both of them sacrificed their lives to save people from its clutches. But, alas, today both of them are being used as tools to spread Brahminism.
[Reply]
Rocky Reply:
July 4th, 2011 at 2:07 am
What a non sensical write up of our great saint and poetess Meera . If you don’t know the correct story do not at least misinform the public at large. Brahmins did a lot of nasty things, but murder of Meera Bai is only your fiction. Please give some historical details to substantiate your hair brained story.
[Reply]
Harish Reply:
July 4th, 2011 at 2:20 am
Bundle of lies.
Meera herself was Brahmin and she loved Lord Krishna and Meera is held in very high esteem by Hindus because of her unquestionable devotion and love for Lord Krishna. Brahmism has prevailed over centuries becuase of its inner strength and greatness while loose faiths like non-hindu religions have to rely on lies, violence, propaganda just to survive. This is just another example.
[Reply]
tajender Reply:
July 10th, 2011 at 3:23 am
as per hindu law women is below shudr and above chandal.daughter of brhmn is not brhmn.
VedicIndian Reply:
July 4th, 2011 at 3:29 am
The period you are talking about was the beginning of the end for the hindu vedic ideas… Its not a surprise since later the previously undefeatable vedic kings had to bow down before the mob of unruly marauders from the middle east. Surely, the corruption in the society was to be blamed.. However, as is evident from ancient vedic art, women were not particularly kept under wraps!
[Reply]
VedicIndian Reply:
July 4th, 2011 at 3:40 am
Despite being a reporter, you are severely under-educated, ZIA! READ THIS>>>>http://www.indianexpress.com/news/patils-purdah-remark-courts-controversy/33972
Raj Reply:
July 4th, 2011 at 8:01 am
Wow,
Tejender – you use a Hindu saint to justify Hindu traditions? Those were old times, just as unfair to say if I would propose that Sikh gurus were fraud godmen and militants – if equated with current times.
Use that head of yours and get things in perspective.
[Reply]