Let key issues hog limelight

When passions run high, reason takes back seat. A series of intemperate utterances from both sides result in hardening of stand by both, resulting in incidents threatening social harmony. At this juncture, the government has to step in, so that the situation does not go out of control. This is what happened in the recent episode involving controversial film critic and commentator Kathi Mahesh.

All rights come with responsibilities. There cannot be any right without restriction. As told by Abraham Lincoln, “my right to swing my fist ends where your nose begins.” Freedom of speech and expression in any democratic country is subject to reasonable restrictions. Article 19 (1)(a) of the Constitution which guarantees freedom of expression is also subject to reasonable restrictions which can be imposed under Article 19(2) in the interests of public order, decency and morality. 

Hence, to take an argument that the utterances of Kathi Mahesh are covered by fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution (freedom of expression) may not be correct.

Other argument advanced in favour of Kathi Mahesh is that the government has not moved in to take action when such utterances were made by others. Further argument is that he was not the first one to criticise the Ramayana. Earlier writers like Ranganayakamma and Chalam were also critical of our Puranas. 

Regarding the first argument there is lot of merit in it. The government should have firmly dealt with such utterances coming from anyone where the comments go beyond levels of decency and are likely to hurt the sentiments of people. 

As regards the second point, there is a difference between critically reviewing an epic and talking loosely about it. Both cannot be equated. What Mahesh has done was to talk loosely about an important issue and further try to justify it. There cannot be any two opinions that his utterances have hurt the sentiments of the people. Equally reprehensible are the utterances of those who criticised him personally and his family.

Plurality of thought, worship and belief is the bedrock of Hindu religion. It is not a religion preached by anyone but evolved over a period of time absorbing different forms of worship and different beliefs. That is all the more reason for people to be careful not to behave in a manner, hurting the sentiments of others. This equally applies to the sentiments of the minorities within the country.

Such utterances which could have gone unnoticed earlier when the media was not this powerful today. With the growth of print, electronic as well as the social media, news can travel fast far and wide disturbing the social harmony. Media has also equally important responsibility of showing self-restraint and ensure such utterances are not given undue publicity which happened to be the case here.

Intellectuals from different streams of thought have a duty to close ranks and create a platform to work towards putting an end to this unseemly controversy. More pressing issues, economic in nature, need the attention of the nation, viz., employment growth, more equitable distribution of income and issues of livelihood. These controversies fritter away our energies and divert our attention from more pressing economic political issues. I wish media concentrates more on accountability in governance, delivery systems failures which are far more relevant for the people, instead of stoking such controversies and digging into the past.

As far as Hindu religion is concerned the absence of religious social  reformer with conviction of the stature of Ramanujacharya in the last one century is proving a bane for the religion. There is justified Dalit anger  against the way the Hindu society has evolved. And it needs to be addressed and should have been addressed already by the rest of the Hindu society. It is time all intellectuals of the religion including Dalit intellectuals work in this direction.