Secular Mani Shankar Aiyar

by sambarvada Mon Jul 11, 2011 11:45 pm

The Editor,
The New Indian Express,
Kaloor, Kochi.

7th September 2004.

Sir,

I read Mr. S. Gurumurthy's 'Point of View' ("Not Rana Pratap, Shivaji was his model, Mr. Aiyar" - The New Indian Express Kochi September 6 2004 Pg 11) with much interest.

Mr. Gurumurthy quotes Mr. Mani Shankar Aiyar's public statement in a public seminar on secularism at Chennai in the early 1980s, "I am a Brahmin from Tanjore district. Yet I eat beef. I threw my sacred thread . I married, not a Brahmin, but a non-HIndu". His wound up with "I am so secular".
This reeks of that English nursery-rhyme character, Little Tom Thumb's, self-praise "Oh what a good boy am I!".

As a tolerant Hindu, I think Hinduism is broad enough to accept all forms of deviations from those born into its cradle.

In fact, a Moslem guide I met in Istanbul uttered much the same sentiments, when he told me, "If I have accepted the tenets of Islam, whether I adhere to them or not is between me and Allah, and not for another fellow man to judge!"

In this context, Mr. Mani Aiyar is of course fully entitled to do as he pleases, although it is highly arguable whether his actions add up to any form of 'secularism'. 'Non-conformist' would appear to be the truer description.

If my memory is not too far wrong, it was highly fashionable some decades ago for hitherto vegetarians to advertise their conversion to meat-eating (or renunciation of their hereditary vegetarianism) and proclaim publicly with some pride that they were 'cosmopolitan'.. One such previously-strict Saivite with whom I had travelled in earlier days advised me to 'keep up with the times' when ordering chicken sandwiches when I declined to join him in eating.

By and large, South Indian Brahmins, including (even?) those from Thanjavur, to which caste Mr. Aiyar freely admits he belongs, are strictly/scrupulously vegetarian in their culinary habits. I have met many who have unabashedly embraced 'cosmopolitan-ism', the euphemism for what was originally better-known as 'military'. My wife has told me of one Brahmin woman who, after being converted to eating meat, said in her presence, "I wonder how I was able to live all these years without knowing the pleasures of meat-eating." There are many others. In fact, there are even much larger numbers of meat-eaters who have become vegetarians, irrevocably.

The wide tolerance in Hinduism does not give any of us room to criticise any of them.

These instances do not reflect a lack of principles, but merely a pragmatic change in them. In the arena of politics particularly, and perhaps even more so in India, it is impossible to forge ahead without what is termed in Tamil as 'sailing with the tide'. Mr. Aiyar's frank admission that "I eat beef even being Brahmin' may appear to be a boast, but a closer examination makes it sound feeble and emasculated. Once a traditional vegetarian (of any class/caste) crosses his Rubicon and begins eating meat, it should not really matter whether it is fish, chicken, mutton, beef, pork, or in the end analysis, even human flesh itself. I am told that the last is the most tasty of them all, as tigers who have fed on it tend to search for humans afterwards.

As for throwing off the supposed shackles of a 'sacred thread', there is that classic phrase, 'naadu vitta (or 'arinja') paappaanukku poonool venumaa?' So wearing, or not wearing one, is really not of any great consequence. Anyway, that 'sacred thread' is commonly worn by many others than Brahmins alone, so Mr. Aiyar's admission can be taken as weightless.

Coming to the topic of marriage, one between those of different sexes seems (at present anyway) infinitely preferable to same-sex marriages which have become legal and even popular in some countries recently.

Seen in this context, Mr. Aiyar's volunteered information that he 'married, not a Brahmin, but, a non-Hindu could be taken as a sign of great relief that it was a woman after all, rather than another man. As for his personal choice, we can look to Shakespeare who opined that 'hanging and wiving go by Destiny'.

The thrust of Mr. Gurumurthy's article is on the patriot, the late V.D. Savarkar.

But the preface is on Mr. Mani Shankar Aiyar's speech on secularism almost a couple of decades ago, which I find impelled to comment on.

It is not clear whether Mr. Aiyar's uttered opinions on 'secularism' remain unchanged from a couple of decades back, but even if not, it is unlikely that he will find wide acceptance, much less support, for them except among his selected connected political circles.

In fact, come to think of it, his liberal (radical?) views may well boomerang on him when he next has to go to the polls. His opponent(s) could make considerable capital out of them, as he may not find many adherents even in his own camp.

Raju N Narayanan
297 Bedok Sth Ave 3 #07-04,
Singapore 469297
Tel: (65) 64461342

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Pattars/message/2837