Stop diverting Respect from the Living, to Give Respect to the Dead, the HIstorical, the Imaginary & the Non-Existent
Every time someone tries to force you to respect an inanimate object, a dead person, an ideology or an institution, they indirectly steal your self-respect from you. By making you "respect" the dead and the non-living, they make you respect yourself less. And they make you respect other people less -- people who are alive. Respect is a currency in our social lives. It is a scarce and precious currency. This is a diversion of respect from those who are alive, to those who are dead, or those who were never alive in the first place. I object to such diversion.
When I talk about respect, I talk about all the forms of respect.
Respect for the non-living and non-existent manifests itself in many forms. It manifests as worship and devotion. As fear and awe. As blind following and blind faith. As a refusal to think and question. As a refusal to act rightly, or speak out, when violence is being inflicted upon the living.
When I talk about respect, I talk about all the forms of respect.
Respect for the non-living and non-existent manifests itself in many forms. It manifests as worship and devotion. As fear and awe. As blind following and blind faith. As a refusal to think and question. As a refusal to act rightly, or speak out, when violence is being inflicted upon the living.
Without thinking, without questioning, people say things like, "You are insulting the national flag and the national anthem". Or "You are insulting my religion". Or "You are insulting my culture". Or "You are insulting the memory of a great man". Or "You are insulting a great ideology".
Most often, people don't think about what they are saying; they are just parroting some thoughts without application of mind. I know how this works. I have myself guilty of having done this.
Sometimes people who do this are trying to bully you into submission. But most often, they are not. Most people are not thinking straight, and they think they are genuinely defending something greater than themselves. When we say such things, we forget that the national flag has no feelings; it experiences neither pride nor humiliation. The national flag is an idea, a concept, and it is not an alive thing -- unlike you and me.
Religions are not alive. Holy books are not alive. Idols are not alive. Ideologies like Marxism are not alive.
Gandhiism may or may not be a worthy philosophy, but neither Gandhi nor Gandhiism is alive. Gandhians are alive, and they deserve respect. Similarly, Shahid Bhagatsingh is no longer alive. His ideology may be worth following, but it is not alive. The people who genuinely follow his ideology deserve our respect, but don't muddy the waters of our reasoning by saying that the ideology itself deserves respect.
You and I are alive, and we deserve respect. Our thoughts and feelings deserve respect and due consideration. The least among us needs and deserves respect. Yes, all men and women are not equal. Yes, we distinguish ourselves and make ourselves worthy of respect by our actions. Some of us make ourselves worthy of respect, more than others. Let us understand the nature of actions.
Don't institutionalize diversion of the respect of the living, in the name of compulsory patriotism, nationalism, ideology, religiosity, etc. People can command respect through their actions. But when they demand respect for something abstract, and threaten you for not respecting their abstract thing -- whether it is a dead person, an institution or a religion -- one is led to suspect that there is more to their actions than meets the eye. One suspects a hidden agenda.
I have often observed that herd mentality is exploited by some people for their own benefit. Let me give you an example of hidden agenda. It is sometimes observed that a small piece of rock, vaguely resembling an idol, appears under a roadside banyan tree one fine day. That rock may have a smear of saffron-coloured oil the next day. Then some local housewife will come and start lighting a diya or aggarbattis in front of it. Then someone will place some flowers, and hang a bell from the branch. Then someone will arrange a few bricks around it, and put a small makeshift roof on this.
Within one year, this thing has become a temple, and the man who "discovered the idol by miracle" is sitting next to it wearing a dhoti, and putting a tika on the foreheads of people, blessing them and giving prasad. And he starts telling a story about how the Pandavas visited it when they were in vanvas, or how Ram rested here his elbow on a granite rock, and left an indentation that is miraculously preserved till this day. And the devotees return month after month, year after year, with offerings,
Needless to say, the temple has now become a source of his livelihood. And soon, somebody donates money and the temple grows larger, and larger, and larger. From one individual priest sitting under the tree, it becomes a full-fledged temple trust. It attracts patronage from the local MLAs and MPs, and political leaders, and it starts having annual turnover of crores of rupees. Every year, nearing the financial year ending, chartered accountants who handle the accounts of the temple use the massive cash in the devotees daan-peti for laundering money. Every now and then, the gold-plating of the temple is renewed, and God alone knows how many kilos of gold, or silver, or brass, is used in the gold-plating. The temple is renovated with marble or granite, and God alone knows what amounts are spent in the exercise.
You cannot raise questions, because... respect. Respect. Questions are blocked by respect for the feelings of devotees. Respect for the idol. Respect for the religious beliefs. Respect for the great man, the saint who discovered this idol and started this temple. And above all, respect for the deity of that temple.
Respect is a cloak and a shield against questions.
This is the way temples grow. Or political parties grow. Or some institutions grow. Even states and nations grow this way. Some politician sows the idea of a sacred homeland, and next thing you know, people are rioting and immolating themselves for this homeland to be carved out as a separate state, or a nation. Innocent people die for such things because the politician makes them believe that after this homeland is formed, their lives will be like heaven on earth, and rivers of milk and honey will flow. You cannot question the idea of this sacred homeland, because, respect.
But after this new homeland is carved out from the old nation, things remain the same, and sometimes even deteriorate. Only one group of people prosper -- the people who propagated the idea of the homeland. The separatists. They prosper and benefit. They become the ruling class.
But the people never question the idea of the homeland. Because... respect. Respect for the sacred homeland. Respect for the ideology. And respect for the high-priests of that ideology.
Such things grow by diversion of that scarce commodity called respect, from the living to the dead. Such things grow by exploitation of the blind faith of the living.
If you try, we will call it what it is: Theft. You may be the Prime Minister, you may be a Supreme Court judge, you may be the high-priest of a temple built in the combined name of martyrs such as Shahid Bhagat Singh and the martyrs of Kargil. But if you steal respect from the living and try to endow it on the dead, you are stealing. It may be institutionalized theft, but it is still theft.
Most often, people don't think about what they are saying; they are just parroting some thoughts without application of mind. I know how this works. I have myself guilty of having done this.
Sometimes people who do this are trying to bully you into submission. But most often, they are not. Most people are not thinking straight, and they think they are genuinely defending something greater than themselves. When we say such things, we forget that the national flag has no feelings; it experiences neither pride nor humiliation. The national flag is an idea, a concept, and it is not an alive thing -- unlike you and me.
Religions are not alive. Holy books are not alive. Idols are not alive. Ideologies like Marxism are not alive.
Gandhiism may or may not be a worthy philosophy, but neither Gandhi nor Gandhiism is alive. Gandhians are alive, and they deserve respect. Similarly, Shahid Bhagatsingh is no longer alive. His ideology may be worth following, but it is not alive. The people who genuinely follow his ideology deserve our respect, but don't muddy the waters of our reasoning by saying that the ideology itself deserves respect.
You and I are alive, and we deserve respect. Our thoughts and feelings deserve respect and due consideration. The least among us needs and deserves respect. Yes, all men and women are not equal. Yes, we distinguish ourselves and make ourselves worthy of respect by our actions. Some of us make ourselves worthy of respect, more than others. Let us understand the nature of actions.
Don't institutionalize diversion of the respect of the living, in the name of compulsory patriotism, nationalism, ideology, religiosity, etc. People can command respect through their actions. But when they demand respect for something abstract, and threaten you for not respecting their abstract thing -- whether it is a dead person, an institution or a religion -- one is led to suspect that there is more to their actions than meets the eye. One suspects a hidden agenda.
I have often observed that herd mentality is exploited by some people for their own benefit. Let me give you an example of hidden agenda. It is sometimes observed that a small piece of rock, vaguely resembling an idol, appears under a roadside banyan tree one fine day. That rock may have a smear of saffron-coloured oil the next day. Then some local housewife will come and start lighting a diya or aggarbattis in front of it. Then someone will place some flowers, and hang a bell from the branch. Then someone will arrange a few bricks around it, and put a small makeshift roof on this.
Within one year, this thing has become a temple, and the man who "discovered the idol by miracle" is sitting next to it wearing a dhoti, and putting a tika on the foreheads of people, blessing them and giving prasad. And he starts telling a story about how the Pandavas visited it when they were in vanvas, or how Ram rested here his elbow on a granite rock, and left an indentation that is miraculously preserved till this day. And the devotees return month after month, year after year, with offerings,
Needless to say, the temple has now become a source of his livelihood. And soon, somebody donates money and the temple grows larger, and larger, and larger. From one individual priest sitting under the tree, it becomes a full-fledged temple trust. It attracts patronage from the local MLAs and MPs, and political leaders, and it starts having annual turnover of crores of rupees. Every year, nearing the financial year ending, chartered accountants who handle the accounts of the temple use the massive cash in the devotees daan-peti for laundering money. Every now and then, the gold-plating of the temple is renewed, and God alone knows how many kilos of gold, or silver, or brass, is used in the gold-plating. The temple is renovated with marble or granite, and God alone knows what amounts are spent in the exercise.
You cannot raise questions, because... respect. Respect. Questions are blocked by respect for the feelings of devotees. Respect for the idol. Respect for the religious beliefs. Respect for the great man, the saint who discovered this idol and started this temple. And above all, respect for the deity of that temple.
Respect is a cloak and a shield against questions.
This is the way temples grow. Or political parties grow. Or some institutions grow. Even states and nations grow this way. Some politician sows the idea of a sacred homeland, and next thing you know, people are rioting and immolating themselves for this homeland to be carved out as a separate state, or a nation. Innocent people die for such things because the politician makes them believe that after this homeland is formed, their lives will be like heaven on earth, and rivers of milk and honey will flow. You cannot question the idea of this sacred homeland, because, respect.
But after this new homeland is carved out from the old nation, things remain the same, and sometimes even deteriorate. Only one group of people prosper -- the people who propagated the idea of the homeland. The separatists. They prosper and benefit. They become the ruling class.
But the people never question the idea of the homeland. Because... respect. Respect for the sacred homeland. Respect for the ideology. And respect for the high-priests of that ideology.
Such things grow by diversion of that scarce commodity called respect, from the living to the dead. Such things grow by exploitation of the blind faith of the living.
If you try, we will call it what it is: Theft. You may be the Prime Minister, you may be a Supreme Court judge, you may be the high-priest of a temple built in the combined name of martyrs such as Shahid Bhagat Singh and the martyrs of Kargil. But if you steal respect from the living and try to endow it on the dead, you are stealing. It may be institutionalized theft, but it is still theft.
Those who are dead -- be they Ambedkar, Nehru, Gandhi, Thackeray or Shivaji -- are irrevocably dead. While they were alive, they may have commanded great respect. But they are now dead; they are a bunch of ashes, and dust, and memories. They cannot experience insult or praise. Their cronies or "supporters" can experience insult or praise by proxy, vicariously, but that is not the same thing.
The least among us who are alive are greater than the greatest among those who are dead. Because no matter how insignificant you and I may be, we are the PRESENT. And no matter how great the great people may have been, they are the PAST. The present is greater than the past -- no matter how glorious that past is claimed to have been. The present is virile and fertile; from the loins of the present will spring the future. The past is impotent and incapable of breeding anything.
Temples and memorials and political parties based on past "great leaders" are intended to institutionalize. Exactly, what is institutionalized? What is institutionalized is the exploitation of people who are alive, for the benefit of the high priests of these "great leaders" or "great ideologies". I believe that those who are dead must be cremated and forgotten. Stories that are imaginary must be relegated to fairyland. Inspiring stories of historical heroes may be made into books and movies, but leave them there. Don't mimic the voices of these dead historical heroes. Don't gain leadership by speaking in the voices of the dead and bygone. Don't try to confuse the common man by trying to don the identity of the dead, or by becoming the high-priests of institutions built as memorials for the dead.
Respect those who are alive. Respect those speak for themselves in their own authentic voices. As for mimics of the voices of the dead, there is indeed a place for them under the sun, and we will never truly be rid of them. But never forget that they are mimics. A mimic should never be confused with the real personality.
"By questioning my prophet / my religion / my political leader / my institution, you are insulting them," the high priests and the mimics of the dead may say.
To them, I would say, "No, I am not insulting them, because they are dead, or they never existed. They have no feelings. You and I have feelings. You and I can be insulted, hurt and offended. You are free to profess your religion or your political faith, and you are free to try to win converts to your cause."
"And I am free to profess my religionlessness and my skepticism, and to try to win converts to my cause. You believe what a particular book says, what a particular guru says, what a particular leader says, and you may keep trying to spread those beliefs. I may question those very beliefs which are being thrust upon me, and thrust upon people around me. We are both free to do this. But it's not personal; don't make it personal."
To them, I would say, "No, I am not insulting them, because they are dead, or they never existed. They have no feelings. You and I have feelings. You and I can be insulted, hurt and offended. You are free to profess your religion or your political faith, and you are free to try to win converts to your cause."
"And I am free to profess my religionlessness and my skepticism, and to try to win converts to my cause. You believe what a particular book says, what a particular guru says, what a particular leader says, and you may keep trying to spread those beliefs. I may question those very beliefs which are being thrust upon me, and thrust upon people around me. We are both free to do this. But it's not personal; don't make it personal."
"We don't have to necessarily agree on everything. You are free to state your own beliefs as I am free to dissect those beliefs. You are free to dissect my beliefs or my attitude. Keep it intellectual, keep it clean, don't make it personal, and we can still be cordial."
"As long as you don't try to make your freedom more sacrosanct than my freedom, we can be friends. Or, at any rate, we can be civil to one another."
Krishnaraj Rao
81694 71229
Krishnaraj Rao
81694 71229
A wonderful Article! It needs to be read by every Indian! It needs to be prescribed in course books, so children don't grow up to be perpetually ready-to- be-offended adults. And the article is particularly relevant for the times we live in.
ReplyDelete