Showing posts with label buddhism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label buddhism. Show all posts

2.4.14

The Election Commission's Ethics

Aamir Khan: Muffling an 'ethical' laugh?

For all the hot air about voting as a right and duty, it is being hawked by brand ambassadors. After dithering (over what?), actor Aamir Khan has come on board as the voice of conscience. The Election Commission now has stars in its eyes with its own “national icon”.


The video spot, interestingly, does not just stop at Aamir asking people to vote. The cinestar, known for his "perfectionist" approach, also exhorts people to vote ethically...Aamir asks people to resolve to vote without fear, pressure or inducement, financial or otherwise. As the musical score of 'Saare Jahan Se Achcha' plays in the background, Aamir is shown tying a tricolour thread on his wrist and taking a pledge not to "sell" his vote in the name of religion, caste or any other inducement. "I pledge that I will untie this tricolour thread only after I have cast my vote in these elections," he says and calls upon people to take the same pledge.

Will Aamir Khan take a pledge not to portray a corrupt politician on screen ever? Will he ensure that his peers in the film industry and those in advertising, of which he is a part, take all payments in cheque and do not endorse any unethical product? 

Politics is about social discourse too. You cannot be ethical selectively. What does tying a tricolour thread mean when TV ads sell pasta in the colour of the national flag? So, you can keep eating it to vote ethically?

---

The EC’s role raises important questions. Does a state channel have any business to play moral vigilante? Are voters under tutorship of the Election Commission? Is the definition of ethical by the authorities the same as or similar to that of voters with varied issues and from different strata?

A few days ago the EC in Maharashtra, after appealing to voters to avoid corrupt and criminal, and choose “pro-development”, candidates went further in its enthusiasm and wanted us to sign a pledge:


The letter, written in Marathi for Maharashtra's voters and in other regional languages for people from other states, urges voters to elect a candidate who will 'meet the aspirations of the people and the nation as a whole,' thus making it clear that they should look beyond narrow agendas...and to 'inspire and encourage friends and family members' to vote in this fashion.

The job of the EC is to ensure that candidates follow rules, and do not indulge in corrupt or criminal activities, and that includes going against campaign rules. It must ensure there is no cross voting and people are not denied their right due to goof-ups. It is not the job of the EC to advise on how and who to vote for. If a candidate is hiding assets, how is a voter to know about it? What exactly does pro-development mean? Is the EC also riding a wave? It is also obvious that this is to target the educated middle class. Is this pledge being signed in the slums and rural areas, where the poor often vote for freebies? This is the more obvious aspect, for the rest are bribed with other promises, if not passing of files and berths.

And truth be told, we would not vote if we were not offered something in return. It is barter, and for whatever it is worth the voter is at least empowered by such knowledge. The EC is infantilising the procedure. Like a bunch of obedient students, after we sign the pledge, “Voters can either give the letter back to the school or submit at the nearby polling centres or election offices before or at the time of voting”.

This contradicts anonymous voting, for the pledge will have our name, signature, polling station number and name, assembly segment number and name. This is not only unlawful, but unethical.

---

If you want ethics, and however much you may snigger, it is in this rather basic move by Rakhi Sawant, an item girl in Bollywood. I am deliberately highlighting it because it is a job for which she earns and has declared her assets. There is more:


And in an interesting first from the zone, the debutant has submitted Annexure 16 detailing her expenses on public meetings and rallies. Also, she was the only one to specify the number of vehicles to be used in her campaign, the proposed expenses on pandals, lights, furniture, posters, etc.

The other actor who is getting noticed is BJP’s Smriti Irani, automatically considered worth attention and respect because she has enacted ‘bahu’ roles in TV soaps. This has been marketed as the USP by her party. Ironical, for she is contesting in Amethi against Rahul Gandhi, whose mother Sonia has often been called out for being just a dynasty bahu. That apart, politics is unforgiving business. The Aam Aadmi Party’s Kumar Vishwas took a potshot at her:


“The message has reached villages. Now it doesn’t matter whether Irani comes, Pakistani comes, Italian or American ... Amethi has already taken a decision.”

Vishwas is a stand-up comic. He is also silly. However, the reaction, especially about the Pakistan reference, is astounding. The earlier NDA government was behind the huge PR exercise called the Agra Summit.

This particular statement does not qualify as misogyny, although there have been way too many instances, including the term ‘Hate Hags’ used for the BJP’s women candidates. It is a patriarchal system where the only manner in which women can be reduced is to personalise/sexualise their identities. Every party has indulged in such lookism fantasies. 

Worse, it is disgusting to watch that panellists in discussions are repeating the offensive terms. How does that work against hate speech?

End note:

Look at this picture of Buddhist monks in Bihar wearing Nitish Kumar masks.





Imagine what would happen if some mullahs did so? Or sadhus? Or Christian priests? Does this not amount to religious interference in the state?

© Farzana Versey

---

Images: Hindustan Times, Times of India

10.7.13

Bodh Gaya attacks and political 'terrorism'




The Dalai Lama laughed a short laugh. Then, he said such small small things happen...few individuals are involved.

He was asked to respond to the bomb blasts in Bodh Gaya, Bihar. On Sunday evening I tuned in to Headlines Today. It had been over 12 hours since the attack in the early hours. The reporters had reached there. The verdict, however, was out way before that. We'll get there.

First, let me tell you about this amazing reportage. A Nepali woman and a Bhutanese man were being interviewed, and the questions contained the answer. Essentially, that this was bound to happen, there was not enough security. There was such a barrage of implication in the queries, with the emphasis on "the seat of Buddhism...of peace and tolerance", that the woman was forced to say, "What harm has the Buddha done?"

And later it was the Dalai Lama who laughed. He is the head of the Buddhist community the world over. But, apparently, our news anchors and TV reporters are the holinesses.

Politicians are playing politics, resulting in terror tourism, and we are not talking about the recce by the culprits. Most senior leaders have visited or are planning a visit, mainly to score points.

In his enthusiasm to not jump the gun over the Indian Mujahideen, one of the main suspect organisations, the Congress Party's Digvijaya Singh got tangled in a web:

"Amit Shah (BJP general secretary) promises a grand temple at Ayodhya. Modi addresses Bihar BJP workers and asks them to teach Nitish (Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar) a lesson. Next day bomb blasts at Mahabodhi Temple at Bodhgaya. Is there a connect? I don't know."

If he does not know, then he ought to keep quiet. Instead, he gave a lecture to the opposition:

"BJP also gave statements linking the persecution of Muslims in Myanmar to this incident. They are clearly targeting Muslims and I want to say to all that for god's sake, let the NIA complete the investigation."

He was repeating what has been implied and stated by the usual suspects. Even if the Myanmar angle turns out to be true, on what basis should this permit "targeting Muslims"?

There is absolutely no reason and basis for any such acts to be committed anywhere in the world. Terrorists, of extremist organisations as well as establishment machinery, have no business to target innocent people. However, 'civil society' has taken on the mantle of mimicking the attitude it abhors by using language as a tool. The hate speech and insinuations, quoting from ancient religious texts, seems to have become a lucrative pastime. Therefore, it is not surprising that the verdict was pronounced.

It gets more people to salivate than discussing the security lapses. If agencies send warnings, why are necessary precautions not taken? Are most such warnings red herrings or the result of paranoia?

To specifically talk about the Maha Bodhi temple, the statue of Buddha was not damaged. The terrorists used low intensity bombs during a time when few people would be there. Two monks were unfortunately injured, one seriously.

What message were the terrorists trying to convey, given that they are usually clear about their intent?

Sushma Swaraj said, "India is the land of the Buddha. We will not allow a Bamiyan here."

It is a good sentiment. One hopes that at least in contemporary times Buddhists, and not only Tibetans, are in safe hands. It wasn't so in the past, the same past that the Hindutva parties love. This quote might put things in perspective:

According to the historian S. R. Goyal, the decline of Buddhism in India is the result of the hostility of the Hindu priestly caste of Brahmins. The Hindu Saivite ruler Shashanka of Gauda (590–626) destroyed the Buddhist images and Bo Tree, under which Siddhartha Gautama is said to have achieved enlightenment. Pusyamitra Sunga (185 BC to 151 BC) was hostile to Buddhism, he burned Sūtras, Buddhists shrines and massacred monks. With the surge of Hindu philosophers like Adi Shankara, along with Madhvacharya and Ramanuja, three leaders in the revival of Hindu philosophy, Buddhism started to fade out rapidly from the landscape of India."

And it isn't all quite a nice scene that it is made out to be. This is beyond politics and recent. Buddhist monks have been demanding control over the Bodh Gaya shrine against the Hindu majority in the managing committee as per the Bodhgaya Temple Act, 1949. They had to take the matter up with the Supreme Court.

More from this report:

"The Gaya district magistrate is the ex officio chairman of the panel while other members are nominated. What has been deemed ultra vires of the Constitution by many legal experts is a provision that empowers the state government to nominate a Hindu as the chairman of the committee if the DM of Gaya is not a Hindu."

There is a Shiva temple within the precinct, which seemed to give it some legitimacy. How it got there is a different matter.

The report further states:

"Buddhist monks have gone on indefinite hunger strikes demanding that the community be handed over control of the shrine. NCM had passed a unanimous resolution in 2005 that the Act needs to be amended. However the demand for full control has never cut much ice."

So much for concern for Buddhists. Meanwhile, the latest news is that no one has been arrested. Indeed, this ought to be news too. In October, Delhi Police had handed over information. On July 3, a DIG reviewed security with local administration. It is impossible for any security to be foolproof, but if 10 of 13 bombs go off within a small radius, should not the government be more transparent?

Home Minister Sushil Kumar Shinde said:

"Arresting anyone in a hurry is not right. Investigations should go into detail and catch hold of the real culprits...There are so many complex problems. Infiltration from other countries is there, Naxalites are there, local communal disturbances are there. We have to see all angles."

He was asked about the Naxal angle. The infiltration problem is a concern always. As regards communal disturbances, I hope he and everyone realises there are more than two communities in India.

And in what has become a mandatory requirement, Muslim organisations in Mumbai have condemned the blasts. I dislike this defensiveness. One day, though, peace-loving Buddhists too will speak out against the killing of Muslims in Myanmar. They constitute five per cent of the population.

Until then, politicians can continue to run our lives and protect places of worship. They are the new gods feeding hate.

"Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned." (The Buddha)

© Farzana Versey

---

An earlier post on the stony reaction to a Buddhist nun's rape

12.7.11

The Sleeping Buddhists

Where is Richard Gere now, and the Dalai Lama? A Nepali Buddhist nun who was gang-raped will be stripped of her religious habit and thrown out of the nunnery. Is it her fault that five men sexually assaulted her in a bus?

Buddhist organisations have said she had lost her religion and in a shocking statement the Nepal Buddhist Federation declared:

“Such a thing never happened in Buddha’s lifetime. So he did not leave instructions about how to deal with it. Buddhists all over the world adhere to what he had laid down: that a person can’t be considered ordained in case of having a physical relationship. It’s applicable to men and women.”

The Buddha chose a certain path – do all Buddhists adhere to it? There is a difference between the utterings and rituals of a given time and what happens later. Not everyone who chooses Buddhism comes from a background similar to the Buddha or follows every idea embedded in the faith. Most people are fascinated by the Buddhist credo mainly because it propagates a free-form kind of belief that is not stringently organised. There is a denial of godliness itself. Has that remained so? No. Not only has there been a denial of what Buddhism stands for, but the Buddha has himself become part of iconography with statues everywhere. Besides, there are the living gods. Therefore, it is obvious that the religion has evolved tangentially into different sects.

We regularly see how religious places abuse people and the abusers are the keepers of the faith. It is a power game and even more disgusting because supposedly hallowed places are misused.

The raped nun did not have a “physical relationship”. Five men forced themselves on her. She is just 21 and has been in the nunnery for ten years. This has been her chosen life. It would do the authorities some good if they realised that, like other faiths, the Buddhist places too have their aberrants who take advantage of the female nuns. Instead of trying to help her heal, they are discarding her for a crime she did not commit.

Has the Dalai Lama formulated a profound tweet on the nun’s misfortune?

Moreover, since she is an ordinary nun and from a tribal community – some more introspection regarding the egalitarian, non-hierarchical nature of the faith - and not a well-known publicly-acclaimed Buddhist, she will have to suffer in silence. Why? Because the Buddha did not “leave instructions” for such an eventuality? Did the Buddha leave instructions on how to glorify Hollywood stars who have ‘embraced’ Buddhism and go around with halos and trip on spirituality during their time out from their Beverly Hills mansions and occasional scandals?

- - -
“An idea that is developed and put into action is more important than an idea that exists only as an idea.” 
- Gautama Buddha

3.5.11

News meeows

Hurriyat chairman Syed Ali Geelani asked people in Kashmir to stop pelting stones at cops and security personnel:

“Religious debate about the relevance of stone pelting notwithstanding, we have realized stone pelting yielded no contribution to the freedom struggle last year. Instead, we lost 118 youth in last year's unrest.”

Religious debate? Is he out of his mind? The stone pelters were doing it because of disaffection and not because of any religious reason. There is nothing like a freedom struggle of last year that is any different from the years before – the methods alter a bit.

It is Geelani who was riding the wave and not the other way round. Geelani will never win an election in Kashmir; that is not to say those who win elections are right or in their right mind. The Hurriyat leader is trying to take over the real movement, but then what’s new? He is not the only one.

- - -

A person has a right to her/his private beliefs. So, it was surprising to read these views in a TOI interview of India’s former chief justice, P. N.Bhagwati, a devotee of Satya Sai Baba for 42 years, regarding his devotion intruding into his work:

As a professional, each time I would sit down to write a judgment at 5 ‘o'clock in the morning, I was only writing what my god dictated. Bhagwan held my hand as I put pen to paper. Everything that I have achieved in respect of the law, and people say I have achieved a lot, is owing to the guidance and inspiration of Sathya Sai Baba. There is no doubt on that score.

And this from someone who dealt with legal matters and is supposed to be aware -


On alleged offences committed by Sai Baba that were never investigated:

What is the point of investigation? (Agitated) Bhagwan is divinity personified, he radiates joy; millions worship him. He is a teacher of mankind.


On ashrams inmates killed when there was an attempt on Baba’s life:

I am not aware of this. I live in Delhi, so I have no knowledge.


On succession:

…there is no row over succession. How can anybody succeed God? Who succeeded Lord Krishna?

- - -


I really want to steer clear of naked women and women with veils. They are two extreme positions, but after all the noise would we not like to know about non-Islamic countries?

Tourists in Barcelona who wander off the beach onto the streets in just their swimming costumes — or even less — will now face stiff fines. The city hall voted to ban “nudity or virtual nudity in public places” and limit swimming costumes to swimming pools, beaches, adjacent roads and beach walks. Nudists who stray off their designated areas of the beach will be subject to fines of 300 to 500 euros.

From another report:

"We want to make people understand that it's an attitude that we don't like, that it's not banned or punishable but that it's something we don't think is civil," a spokeswoman for the city hall said.

Municipal authorities in the seaside Spanish city have already printed posters showing a couple in swimming costumes with a red line across it, along with another couple dressed normally but without the red line.





Sometime ago it was Sri Lanka:

Nimal Rubasinghe, secretary of the Cultural Affairs Ministry, said the government had received representations calling for a ban on wearing revealing clothing in public. “There have been complaints from various quarters about miniskirts, but we are only considering them and no final decision has been taken.”

“There are individuals and groups representing religious and cultural interests, who have written to us raising concerns that this kind of (mini) dress would corrupt our culture,” Minister T B Ekanayake was quoted as saying by the Lakbima news daily.

President Mahinda Rajapakse’s government had ordered the removal of billboards featuring scantily-clad women.

Second look: Last year, US singer Akon was denied a visa to perform in Sri Lanka after Buddhist monks took offence at one of his videos that featured women in bikinis dancing around a pool in front of a Buddha statue. The Sri Lankan army has committed atrocities against Tamil women.

- - -

I used to like Kiran Bedi. She still makes sense, but what is she doing on TV hosting Aap ki Kachehri (People’s Court) where melodramatic performers enact some flimsy tangled issue and she flashes papers and declares justice? It demeans her position and gives the perception of a kangaroo court. But then, she is part of the Hazare movement and it goes with such a belief.

Interestingly, she also endorses a detergent to convey a clean image!

- - -

Talking of ads, the senior Bachchan couple are selling diamonds. It is nice to see an older couple in such an ad, but Amitabh brings this heavy diamond necklace and is given a run-down by Jaya: “What would you know about diamonds?” He mutters to the camera, “Women!” Then he goes on a discovery tour and brings the necklace with the info and she is impressed. Just when he is exulting over it, she asks, with a sulk, “And bangles?” And he mutters even more silently, “Women…”

We really cannot break ground, can we? Typical avaricious woman, nagging woman. Incidentally, the neck piece is not worth all that effort. It looks like greed.