MF Husain Nudes: Judgment

This follows: MF Husain Nudes: Talibanization of India Slowed Down

 

Sanjay Kishan Kaul has a done a good job in penning down his reasons on why he has quashed some criminal cases pending against M F Husain for allegedly hurting sentiments of many Indian Hindus. His judgment has far reaching consequences for our constitutional democracy. This landmark judgment is historical and should be celebrated. 

The judge has used this opportunity to discuss many other things, about Art, about freedom of expression, about Indian History, definition of personal morality, etc.

This is what the judge had to say [All emphasis mine]. He began by quoting Pablo Picasso.

“Art is never chaste. It ought to be forbidden to ignorant innocents, never allowed into contact with those not sufficiently prepared. Yes, art is dangerous. Where it is chaste, it is not art.”

Many people don’t understand Art really. There is no need for everyone to understand it either. Does every Tom Dick and Harry pick up Milton to read his poems or do common men go and see Picasso’s paintings in a museum? How many Indians have read the sordid and erotic stories of Shakuntala and Dushyanth? And how many of them have enthusiastically admired fornicating deities in Kajuraho?

The judge ventures into the history of India which was surfeit with erotic art.

With a 5000-year-old culture… Ancient Indian art has been never devoid of eroticism where sex worship and graphical representation of the union between man and woman has been a recurring feature.

The sculpture on the earliest temples of ‘Mithuna’ image or the erotic couple in Bhubeneshwar, Konarak and Puri in Orissa (150-1250 AD); Khajuraho in Madhya Pradesh (900-1050 AD); Limbojimata temple at Delmel, Mehsana (10th Century AD); Kupgallu Hill, Bellary, Madras; and Nilkantha temple at Sunak near Baroda to name a few.

These and many other figures are taken as cult figures in which rituals related to Kanya and Kumari worship for progeny gained deep roots in early century A.D. Even the very concept of ‘Lingam’ of the God Shiva resting in the centre of the Yoni, is in a way representation of the act of creation, the union of Prakriti and Purusua. 

The judge then cites the link between erotic art and religion itself. Here, it is important to understand that eastern religions did not develop the way Abrahamic religions have developed. The modern Hindu accustomed to, or overwhelmed by the morality inherited from Abrahamic religions, tends to believe that Hinduism is somehow very similar in its moral teachings as that of Abrahamic religions and in an earnest attempt to compete with Abrahamic religions he wants Hinduism to impose more stringent rules and codes on personal morality.

The ultimate essence of a work of ancient Indian erotic art has been religious in character and can be enunciated as a state of heightened delight or ananda, the kind of bliss that can be experienced only by the spirit.

He asks: 

We have been called as the land of the Kama Sutra then why is it that in the land of the Kama Sutra, we shy away from its very name?... Indian art has always celebrated the female form. There is nothing salacious about it.

Beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder and so does obscenity. It is our perception to objects, thoughts and situations, which rule the mind to perceive them in the way we do. 

He quashed the plea “that the said painting uploaded on a website could be accessed by any person sitting across the globe who in consequence whereto could get affected by viewing the same.”

There can be no exasperation caused by viewing such painting on the website for the reason that a person would firstly access such a website only if he has some interest in art and that too contemporary art and in case he does view such a website, he always would have the option to not to view or close the said web page.

It seems that the complainants are not the types who would go to art galleries or have an interest in contemporary art, because if they did, they would know that there are many other artists who embrace nudity as part of their contemporary art. 

To calm down those complainants who accused MF Husain of deliberately hurting their sentiments, the judge says:

…there seems to be no deliberate intention on the part of the petitioner [MF Husain] to hurt feelings of Indians as already stated and as a matter of fact, the subject matter i.e Bharat Mata could be alleged to wound nationalist feelings of an individual and not any religious feelings.

This is interesting. He asks the pertinent question, ‘Why are Hindus considering Bharat Mata a religious icon?’ The claimants to hurt sentiments ask MF Husain the question, “Why do you paint ‘our’ icons nude and not ‘your’ icon nudes?” by which they conveniently put M F Husain and his identity (that of a Muslim) as an outsider which is the wont of most nationalist and Hindu Indians to naturally assume that Muslims are outsiders.

As I discussed in the earlier article, ‘does depiction of a symbol in nude same as depiction of a real mother in nude?’ The judge rightly addresses this question:

… the impugned painting cannot form the basis of any deliberate intention to wound the religious feelings of the complainants since the figure, on the basis of the identity alleged, represents an anthropomorphic depiction of a nation as also that to hold a person liable under the above said section, mere knowledge of the likelihood that the religious feelings of another person may be wounded would not be sufficient.

How could the claimants to ‘hurt sentiments’ own up Bharat Mata as their own excluding Muslims from it? Is it to do with the prevailing notion that Muslims are not patriotic enough? That India is Hindu which accommodates Muslims as guests?