Spewing Poison Comes Easily to Some People: Harini Swaminathan in Swarajyamag

 

Spewing Poison Comes Easily to Some People:

Harini Swaminathan in Swarajyamag

Shrikant Talageri

 

I knew when I wrote my review article on The Kashmir Files that I would be the recipient of hate-mail or hate-comments from two categories of poison-pens: the Woke-Leftist Hindu-haters and the BJP-Brigade. My article was printed in Swarajyamag, and immediately the article received two angry missives (there will be many more, but I think these two are representative enough).

The article got a reply from a typical Woke-leftist person called Ashish, which expressed all the frustration and anger that Woke-leftists must be feeling now at the runaway success of The Kashmir Files, and the very real possibility (at least I hope and pray so) that this film will signal a new era in film making in India when it comes to political and historical issues, breaking the total stranglehold that Woke-leftism has been enjoying in the Indian media (especially in the world of Indian films) till now. I will not bother to reply to this pathetic person: he is probably in a very bad psychological condition anyway at the moment, in a state of shock and disbelief, and what he writes is being written (about the film) by countless other Woke-leftists all over the world.

 

The second missive (or pair of missives) was from a person named Harini Swaminathan. The name seemed vaguely familiar, but a check on the internet showed many prominent Harini Swaminathans, and I don't want to zero in on the wrong one. I find her missives interesting, and, just for this once I will deign to take cognizance of hate mail on the subject of The Kashmir Files. The film itself is going to (at least I again hope and pray so) go on its way like a steamroller or military tank, crushing all critics, and, having had my say on the film, I will not bother henceforward with hostile reactions to my article on the subject.

This lady writes as follows in the first missive:

"More I read this piece the more I get angry about this author. I respect his work on Indic matters, but now I am honestly not sure. Sir - do you follow political news or just decided to write a movie review like any bollywood movie? Have you followed a Sunanda Vasisht or Aditya Nath Kaul or read Jagmohan’s book - those who have been screaming about sad state of affairs of Kashmiri hindus for so many years now? And so many others who have struggled to find forums to express, have presented themselves in every meeting organized by big shots with separatist terrorists only to be denied entry and jailed? and yet you call they were ostrich like? It is one thing to criticize that specific movie character but how can you ignore history and brush the entire community with your sweeping brush? And you dare to compare a genocide with intellectual dissent with your work? What has your work on Vedas got to do with The Kashimir Files? You have a problem with a Modi mention? Despite the fact that it is Modi Govt that arrested him finally? Were you even following news when under Modi it was first mentioned that India would NOT allow separatists in pakistan peace talks? Do you know the outrage it caused? Here was a man who resisted inclusion of Hurriyat and other terrorists/ separatists for the FIRST time. And that mention is cringe worthy?? (Of course the movie makes fun of Viswa Guru also and you don’t care to mention it)."

And the second one:

"I don't know if you mean Hindus lack documentation or lack dictionary. If it is the former, I would challenge Shrikantji to show me one other religion that has the literature - the depth and breadth as Hinduism (or ancient India ) has. It is humongous covering not just religion, but philosophy, science, medicine, mathematics and all. Even today there are so many books in manuscripts that are yet to be studied. If dictionary is meant, the advanced system of Sanskrit language construct scorns dictionary. It literally thinks dictionary users as beginners in the language. People who think a word can be translated in one way or simply a set of ways miss the innumerable other ways by application of other rules. It expects learners to read and use the language based on roots (dhatus) with the application of rules that are clear and precise. To help people studying these texts at different times needing contextual references - there are commentaries. . Following a dictionary like Monier Williams is the worst way to interpret our Sanskrit texts - that is the reason we have all the awful mistranslations that have now almost become the standard reference books for Western and sadly many Indian Indologists also. I don't know what is meant by Ostrich like behavior. Sounds rather harsh judgement to me. Yes, there is zero organization on the part of Hindus. That makes us easy targets in places where rule of law is absent. This however is not the problem with Kashmiri Hindus alone, but with Hindus everywhere. But these movies will play a vital role for Hindus to realize the power of organization."

 

Let me take up these points one by one:

 

1. "More I read this piece the more I get angry about this author. I respect his work on Indic matters, but now I am honestly not sure.".

When I write, I always write what I believe is the Truth, and I am very well aware that the Truth makes more enemies than friends. If my aim was to avoid making people angry, or to earn their "respect", I would not be writing anything. So, sad though this reaction may be, I am not excessively perturbed by it.

 

2. "Sir - do you follow political news or just decided to write a movie review like any bollywood movie? Have you followed a Sunanda Vasisht or Aditya Nath Kaul or read Jagmohan’s book - those who have been screaming about sad state of affairs of Kashmiri hindus for so many years now? And so many others who have struggled to find forums to express, have presented themselves in every meeting organized by big shots with separatist terrorists only to be denied entry and jailed? and yet you call they were ostrich like? It is one thing to criticize that specific movie character but how can you ignore history and brush the entire community with your sweeping brush?"

I thought my article was pro-Kashmiri Pandit, but this intelligent lady has managed to make me aware that I am very anti-Kashmiri-Pandit indeed!

The sentence she objects to so much was in the note I added to the article two days after uploading it on my blog, and it referred to an article in the National Telegraph of Canada. I asked the readers to read this article as it is really an excellent one, and wrote: "it brings to light certain points that I did not know, such as the fact that Vivek Agnihotri refused an offer from Netflix which required him to delete references to Islamic terrorism in the film, or which I missed out, such as the Kashmiri Pandit community's determinedly ostrich-like behavior — both before, during, and after the events — which was in a way equally responsible for their plight.". However much it may pain people, it is true that Kashmiri Pandits did indulge in ostrich-like behavior, and the writer of that article has expressed it very well (please read what he has written): I am sure many poison-pens from the Hindu side, who do not like bitter facts, must have attacked him as well without even reading what he wrote. She adds in the second missive: "I don't know what is meant by Ostrich like behavior. Sounds rather harsh judgement to me. Yes, there is zero organization on the part of Hindus. That makes us easy targets in places where rule of law is absent. This however is not the problem with Kashmiri Hindus alone, but with Hindus everywhere. But these movies will play a vital role for Hindus to realize the power of organization." All this is exactly what I have been saying in all my books and articles, which this lady has clearly not bothered to read before pulling out her sword: have I ever said that Kashmiri Pandits alone have an ostrich-like behavior? Or are we to believe and declare that the Kashmiri Pandit behavior should be a model for Hindus everywhere? Can you correct past mistakes by denying them totally?

 

3. "And you dare to compare a genocide with intellectual dissent with your work? What has your work on Vedas got to do with The Kashmir Files?"

She certainly "dares" to say I compare a genocide with intellectual dissent with my work. Have I really done that? I had to search my own article to find out where I did this, and here it is: speaking on the lack of historiographic sense among Hindus and their failure to document events properly, I wrote: "Strangely, many Hindus treat this weakness as a sign of Hinduness and something to be proud of. One of the weirder criticisms my analysis of Rigvedic history has produced from the more narrow-minded and orthodox Hindu critics is that by analyzing our Hindu texts for history, something which our ancestors wisely avoided doing, I am somehow betraying those ancestors and our Hindu traditions, and showing that I am under the influence of "western" thought processes!" Only a sick mind would deduce from this that I compared a genocide to dissent with my work.

Returning to the attack on this point of documentation, in her second missive, this lady states: "I don't know if you mean Hindus lack documentation or lack dictionary. If it is the former, I would challenge Shrikantji to show me one other religion that has the literature - the depth and breadth as Hinduism (or ancient India ) has. It is humongous covering not just religion, but philosophy, science, medicine, mathematics and all. Even today there are so many books in manuscripts that are yet to be studied."

This lady who lists things I have not read apparently has not read the article she is attacking: I quoted Monier-Williams who wrote: " Scarcely a subject can be named, with the single exception of historiography, not furnishing a greater number of texts, and commentaries, or commentaries on commentaries than any other language of the ancient world." Does she understand English, and the meaning of the underlined sentence, let alone the whole quote, in my article?

In my detailed article on Hindutva or Hindu Nationalism, I wrote: "It was this scientific temperament which led the ancient Indians to go deep into the study of any and every subject, and to produce detailed texts on everything, whether on religious laws, rituals and customs (the vast Vedic literature: Samhitas, Brahmanas, Kalpasutras, Dharmasutras, etc.), philosophy (the Upanishads, and the sutras, commentaries, and other texts of the six Darshanas and the Buddhist, Jain and heterodox philosophies, etc.), linguistics (Panini, Yaska, and numerous Vedic and post-Vedic texts on Grammar, Phonetics, Etymology, etc.), medicine (the Samhitas of Charaka, Sushruta, Vagbhata, etc.), administration and statecraft (Kautilya’s Arthashastra, etc.), the performing arts (Bharata’s Natyashastra, etc.), and every other possible art, craft, technology and science, right down to the art of making love (Vatsyayana’s Kamasutra). No subject was beyond the detailed investigations of the ancient Indians. And basic texts, on any subject, themselves the culminations of long and rich traditions, were followed by detailed commentaries, and by commentaries on the commentaries. And there were well-established and regulated systems and forums all over the country for objective debates on controversial points or subjects. With all this, it is not surprising that Indian civilisation should have been the source of origin of so many things." I really do not require an educated illiterate person to tell me about the intellectual achievements of Hindus.

 

4. Further: " If dictionary is meant, the advanced system of Sanskrit language construct scorns dictionary. It literally thinks dictionary users as beginners in the language. People who think a word can be translated in one way or simply a set of ways miss the innumerable other ways by application of other rules. It expects learners to read and use the language based on roots (dhatus) with the application of rules that are clear and precise. To help people studying these texts at different times needing contextual references - there are commentaries. Following a dictionary like Monier Williams is the worst way to interpret our Sanskrit texts - that is the reason we have all the awful mistranslations that have now almost become the standard reference books for Western and sadly many Indian Indologists also."

Any person who "scorns" dictionaries must be extremely narrow-minded indeed. If she herself "scorns" dictionaries, that is her own problem, but she should not accuse "the advanced system of Sanskrit language" of this stupidity. Why should the use of dictionaries preclude "learners" from reading and using "the language based on roots (dhatus) with the application of rules that are clear and precise" and paying attention to "contextual references" and reading "commentaries"?

The contemptuous reference to Monier-Williams is typical of armchair Hindus who think everything is solved by berating colonial Indologists. Has this lady even seen a copy of Monier-Williams' dictionary? Would she herself be able to produce such a massive and detailed volume giving so much detailed information? Of course it must be containing mistakes and errors: when people cannot even write poison-pen missives without making errors and showing their ignorance and failure to do homework, isn't it small-minded to give armchair criticism of possible mistakes in such a huge and massive work? Monier-Williams' dictionary is an extremely valuable source, and obviously it should not be the only source or be accepted unquestioningly, but produce a better work before spitting at the sun.

 

5. Finally: "You have a problem with a Modi mention? Despite the fact that it is Modi Govt that arrested him finally? Were you even following news when under Modi it was first mentioned that India would NOT allow separatists in pakistan peace talks? Do you know the outrage it caused? Here was a man who resisted inclusion of Hurriyat and other terrorists/ separatists for the FIRST time. And that mention is cringe worthy?? (Of course the movie makes fun of Viswa Guru also and you don’t care to mention it."

Yes, I have a problem with a Modi mention. She clearly has a problem with my problem. I really have no wish to bandy words with any bhakt of any category, and I could provide a long list of anti-Hindu things done by this government (in the article itself, I referred to the government spending ten thousands of crores of rupees — I must add here, money collected from Hindu temples and Hindu taxpayers —  on minority-only schemes, and defending this in the SC) but I must remind her that this is still a democracy and everyone need not share her biased enthusiasm.

The list of things done for the Kashmiri Pandits by the BJP government, pointed out by her, would have sounded more genuine if she could also have given a list of things being done for Bengali Hindus who stood by the BJP in the elections in that state recently: their story is more recent and more directly connected to the BJP itself.

About what the government has done for the Kashmiri Hindus, I did not claim to be the final authority. I wrote: "Has there really been a basic change in the Kashmir situation? In the face of conflicting reports and claims from the powerful propagandists from both sides, it is difficult to say. It is in fact difficult to trust anyone in present times. I would (as far as it is possible to trust anyone) trust the views of true Kashmiri activists like Sushil Pandit and Ashish Dhar (to name the two that come to my mind)." But I would not trust the views of this lady.

About Viswa Guru: "(Of course the movie makes fun of Viswa Guru also and you don’t care to mention it)". I really don't know what she is talking about. I have suddenly become deaf in the last few months, and I may have missed out on a few dialogues. But if something was said which has aroused her ire, she should take up the matter with the makers of the film or write her own review listing her grouses. Why should she ask me why I have not expressed this grouse, or expect that my failure to express a grouse on one point (even assuming I would have found that bit grouse-worthy) should inhibit me from expressing my grouses when I do have them?

 

I will not be reacting to any more poison-pen comments by anyone else, or even this lady herself again. This is a one-time response.

 

APPENDIX 30/3/2022

I have added many supplementary notes to my above review of The Kashmir Files. I append them below for completeness:

Note added 16-3-2022

I must also request the readers to read another review which has just come to my notice. It seems to be in a Canada edition of "The National Telegraph":

https://thenationaltelegraph.com/culture/the-kashmir-files-bringing-a-politically-incorrect-genocide-to-light

 

This article, apart from showing that this film is receiving attention worldwide (to whatever extent the world is willing to look, and look honestly, at happenings in India), brings to light certain points that I did not know, such as the fact that Vivek Agnihotri refused an offer from Netflix which required him to delete references to Islamic terrorism in the film, or which I missed out, such as the Kashmiri Pandit community's determinedly ostrich-like behavior — both before, during, and after the events — which was in a way equally responsible for their plight. This  is certainly the most important lesson that we must learn from the film. This is typical Hindu behavior. When will Hindus ever learn?

 

 

NOTE added 24/3/2022: In my article "The Twelve Indian Political Figures I Like, Respect and Admire the Most" posted by me on 12/9/2021, I had taken the name of Arvind Kejriwal as one of them.

Today I have added the following addendum to that article:

NOTE added 24/3/2022: If I have made a mistake, I will accept it. In the above article, I have praised Arvind Kejriwal, and written: "Well, I have not as yet seen him do anything much more anti-Hindu and secularist than the Congress or the BJP or any other secularist or "Hindu-when elections-approach" party." Today, by referring to the film The Kashmir Files as a "jhoothi" film in the Delhi assembly, Kejriwal has made me eat my words and made me feel ashamed of myself for the praise I heaped on him in the above article for which I apologize to all Hindus and especially Kashmiri Pandits. Anyone who can deny the massacre of Kashmiri Hindus and the forced migration of 500,000 of them from Kashmir, and vindicate the powerful Leftist lobby which is out to destroy India and which has been exposed in the film, is a very dangerous person for the country. This does not whitewash the multiple sins of the BJP, but it does show that Kejriwal is not an alternative. I am adding this as an addendum rather than making any change in the above article.

In a Hindi film, there was a famous dialogue: "ek macchar aadmi ko ***** bana sakta hai" (one mosquito can make a man into a *****). Likewise, "ek shabd aadmi ko ***** sabit kar sakta hai" (one word can prove a man to be a *****).

All in all (I think I am fairly confident I will not have to eat my words, and eat humble pie, in respect of any of the other names in the above list), it is true that almost all politicians are crooks: "birds of a feather", or as a Marathi phrase puts it: "ekach maleche mani" (beads from the same string), or, most accurately, as an earthy Konkani phrase from Mangalore puts it: "ɛkkā:: lɛṇḍyᾱ: ku:ḍkɛ" (pieces of the same lump of shit).

 

 

Final Note added 27/3/2022: The advantage of writing a blog is that you can keep making incremental additions to the article whenever necessary, though this facility should not be taken too far. So, a last note.

Today evening I saw the film again for the second time, and I liked it much more even than the first time. I honestly think it is one of the best films, maybe even the very best film, I have ever seen. I caught on to more things about the film, and found the acting of all the actors and actresses, and most particularly of Anupam Kher, super-excellent. And, although this must definitely have been for reasons having to do with their own interests, I will admit that the fact that there was a BJP government at the centre did facilitate such a film being made and shown without being throttled to death in its cradle (though this does not neutralize the thousands of other anti-Hindu sins of this government). Also, I found that some of my other grouses detailed above seemed less important

But, I now have one new grouse, and two suggestions:

First, the grouse: the film, at the very beginning, mentioned that it had subtitles in English. But for some reason, hardly even five per cent of the dialogues had subtitles. This is a grouse for me because I have become partially deaf in the last few months, and my only solace now (apart from reading and writing) is watching films and serials on Netflix which have subtitles. I'm sure I must have failed to catch many important nuances in the film.

Next, the two suggestions:

1. This film should be fully dubbed or subtitled in every major Indian and foreign language and propagated like hell.

2. A supplementary documentary should be produced with interviews with actual survivors of the events. 

 

 

Final Note added 30/3/2022: Did I call the earlier note added on 27/3/2022 my "final note"? That was a mistake: this is my final note.

In my above note of 27/3/2022, I wrote "And, although this must definitely have been for reasons having to do with their own interests, I will admit that the fact that there was a BJP government at the centre did facilitate such a film being made and shown without being throttled to death in its cradle (though this does not neutralize the thousands of other anti-Hindu sins of this government)."

Now I must request the readers to read carefully this very interesting article "Kashmir as Arab Armpit" of 24/3/2022 which has just come to my notice:

http://mediacrooks.blogspot.com/

In my earlier blog "The Andaman Islanders and Indian Civilization" I had pointed out how the Andamanese people, who have lived on their land for more than 60000 years, are being shunted out by the present BJP government for cold-bloodedly mercenary purposes:

https://talageri.blogspot.com/2021/02/the-andaman-islanders-and-indian.html

Is it surprising that this government has suddenly, after eight years of being in power, developed the overpowering love for Kashmiri Hindus that their strong advocacy of The Kashmir Files seems to indicate? In this case, they don't even have to take the trouble of shunting out the Kashmiri Hindus: they have been shunted out 30 years ago, and even that is being turned to the credit of this government. Today, a well-timed report (I saw the one in The Hindustan Times today) assures us that 34 properties in J&K have been sold to residents from other parts of India since the abrogation of Article 370: of course most of them are in Hindu areas of Jammu, and for security reasons we are not told who has bought these properties and for what purpose!

My unstinting and unqualified salutations, respect and love for Vivek Agnihotri and his team. But let  none of this reflect on the present Vazir-e-Azam and his Sarkar.