Three Murders and a Lynching

Ram Puniyani

Laws of nature cannot be applied to human society so directly. Still sometimes these have been used to explain-justify social catastrophes, “When a big tree falls. Earth shakes (in the aftermath of anti Sikh massacre 1984), ‘every action has equal and opposite reaction’ (during Gujarat carnage of 2002) are too well known. I have been very puzzled from last month or so since the scholars-writers, who have returned their honors and are being questioned as to why they did not do so when emergency happened or anti Sikh violence took place or when the mass migration of Kashmiri pundits took place or when the Mumbai train blasts killed hundreds of innocent lives.  I am tempted to think of the laws of physics of ‘qualitative transformation’ during heating or cooling of water, the temperature remains the same but water becomes either steam or ice.

Govind Pansare, Narendra Dabholkar, MM Kalburgi

When Dr. Dabholkar, Com Pansare and then Prof Kalburgi were killed over a period of months, the danger signals started being perceived but still it took the beef lynching of Mohammad Akhlaq to give a message that something has drastically changed in the society, and the spate of returning  of Sahiya Academy, National and state, awards followed in quick succession. Their protest was against the rising intolerance in the society. The incidents that followed and ran parallel to these ‘award-returns’ were equally horrific. The killing of a trucker on the assumption that he is carrying cows for slaughter; beating of a MLA in Kashmir Assembly by BJP legislatures and the scattered incidents of attacks on Muslims on the ground of beef consumption are too striking. We are currently facing a situation where anybody can incite the violence by just uttering the word beef, while seeing mutton or some such thing. We are living in an atmosphere where cow cannot be shooed away even if she is blocking the traffic.

The viciousness of atmosphere is not lost on the social perceptions. The insecurity of minorities has gone up by leaps and bounds. One knows that since the present NDA regime came to power all those ‘spewing hate’ are working overtime. For one Akbaruddudin Owaisi there is an army of Sakshi Mahraj, Sadhvis, Yogis and what have you. This army of mostly saffron robed or the one’s with the association with Hindu Nationalist politics has high position within their political combine, what is known as Sangh Parivar. The prime Minister himself had exerted the Hindu youth to emulate Maharana Pratap to save the honor of Mother cow during the election speeches. During this last over one year, words like Haramjades  (illegitimate) have been used with gay abandon. On the mere suspicion; a Pune techie Mohsin Shaikh was done to death. Serial attacks on Churches were passed off as thefts, the love jihad bogey was kept alive and the likes of Yogi Adityanath, the top BJP leader from UP, stated that for every one Hindu girl marrying a Muslim, Hindus should bring 100 Muslim girls. Muslim youth have been barred from participating in festivals like Navaratri. Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi, the BJP’s Muslim face advised those wanting to eat beef to go to Pakistan. The glorification of Mahatma’s killer Godse has been stepped up and temples are being planned in his memory, while a BJP MP from Kerala stated that Godse was right but he chose a wrong target. Atmosphere of communal violence has gone up in a big way during the preceding year.

Even after the awards started being returned the BJP leadership looked down upon the writers/scholars and overlooked the phenomenon which has lead to returning of awards. To mock these writers Buddhi Shuddhi puja path (purification of intellect ritual) has been organized and BJP spokespersons are humiliating them in talk shows with all their ferocity. To cap it all the Haryana Chief Minister, an old RSS pracharak, said that Muslims can live here but only if they will give up beef eating. No doubt the BJP Chief Amit Shah has talked to some of these leaders behind the close doors, but that does seem to be a mock drill as the leaders concerned did say that they went to meet their chief for some other reasons and none of them gave any serious apology.

Disturbed by what is going on, the President Pranab Mukherjee on three occasions urged the nation to uphold, pluralism, the core civilizational value of the country and to uphold tolerance. The Vice President Hamid Ansari reminded the Government that it is the duty of the state to uphold the ‘right to life’ of citizens. The index of the changing social atmosphere is reflected by the statements of two outstanding citizens of the country. Julio Reibero, the top cop, expressed his pain and anguish by saying that “as a Christian suddenly I feel stranger in my own country.” And the renowned actor Naseeruddin Shah had to point out that “Have never been aware of my identity as a Muslim until now.”

These are not ordinary times. The values of pluralism and tolerance have been pushed to the margins. With this Government in power all the wings of communal politics, the RSS affiliates, have unleashed themselves in full blast. Communalism is not just the number of deaths due to violence, it is much more. The foundation of this violence begins with the manufacture of perceptions about the religious minorities. These perceptions based on history and some selective aspects of present society are given an anti human tilt and interpretation. This is used to create hatred for the minorities and that’s where the communal elements can unleash violence either as a massive violence like Gujarat or Mumbai or Bhagalpur or Muzzafarnagar or the one in Dadri. This creates the divides in society which over a period of time is converted into polarization. And polarization is the foundation of electoral strength of party wanting a nation in the name of religion. As per Yale study, the communal violence is the vehicle which strengthens BJP at electoral level.

Communalism has been planted in India over a century and a half ago. The British policy of ‘divide and rule’ used communal historiography as a major weapon. This type of interpretation of history was picked up by communal organizations and given an anti Hindu or anti Muslim tilt and gradually this has been strengthened after every act of violence which has been the outcome of their politics. The present phase is the one where the cup of communalism is spilling out from its earlier levels or boundaries. The intensity of ‘Hate’ constructed around temple destructions, love jihad has been supplemented by the oft used tool of beef. In the present situation where the divisive elements, who are in center stage of politics also know that they are safe and secure as the present Government precisely wants what they are doing, their contrary posturing notwithstanding.

The present combination of the Government guided by the ideology of Hindu nationalism and the ‘fringe elements’ having same ideology, has a vast network and with a wide reach. This party has the advantage that mostly it does not have to dirty its hands in the local agenda of sectarian nationalism, and so there are many elements which can do the local work for dividing the society. The so called fringe elements now are occupying the center stage, and so the ‘qualitative change’ in the situation.  The flood of awards being returned is due to the situation created by deeper communalization of society. This is manifested in growing intolerance, attack on plurality and is leading to the insecurity of minorities, which has qualitatively transcended the earlier limits. The question is how to uphold the values of Indian Constitution in the current times?

Read More

Killing a Rationalist: Silencing Reason

Ram Puniyani

The killing of Professor Maleeshappa Madhivallapa Kalburgi on 30th August 2015 came as a severe jolt to all those who are for an open, liberal society, who uphold the values of reason and are against blind faith. Prof. Kalburgi was a renowned scholar with over 100 books to his credit. He had brought to fore the ideology of Basavanna; the 12th Century poet saint of Kannada; and had supported the idea that Lingyats, the followers of Basavanna be given the status of religious minorities as they do not belong to the Vedic tradition. His study of Vachanas, the teachings contained in the verses of Basavanna, was a profound contribution to the rational thought.

It was his forthright reminder of Basavanna’s teachings, criticism of idol worship and Brahmanical rituals, which earned him the wrath of Hindutva groups like Bajrang Dal. As there are many traditions within the broad pantheon of Hinduism, the atheist tradition has its own existence from centuries, Charvak being the one from ancient times. Even opposition of idol worship is not new to Hindu traditions as Swami Dayanand Sarswati, founder of Arya Samaj, had given the call to stop the idol worship.

Prof MM Kalburgi

Incidentally as we are receiving the news of this killing, the neighboring Bangla Desh has witnessed the murder of three young secular bloggers in recent times (2015). In Syria a Scholar Khaled al-Assad has been put to death by ISIS fanatics. Maharashtra was shaken by the murder of a rationalist of repute Dr. Narendra Dabholkar nearly two years ago. He was instrumental in getting the law against black magic and practices related to blind faith passed in Maharashtra. Another well respected activist, Comrade Govind Pansare was killed just a year ago. Pansare was working on many issues; anti-blind faith campaign being one of them. He is also the author of well known tract on Maharashtra’s revered king Shivaji. Contrary to the communal presentation of Shivaji as anti Muslim king, Pansare shows that Shivaji was the king who was very sympathetic to the farmers (rayyat) and that he was respecting all religions. This interpretation of Shivaji is a great eyesore to the Hindutva politics.

On the back of the murders of these two rationalists, comes the murder of Dr. M.M. Kalburgi on 30th August 2015 in his home in Dharwad. Prof Kalburgi was a very well accomplished man, ex Vice Chancellor of Kannada University in Hapmi, and recipient of National and Karnataka Sahitya Academy Awards for his writings. The learned professor had deep study of Virshaiva, Basavanna tradition amongst others. The opposition to him was due to his criticism of idol worship, Brahmanical rituals and ritualization of Basavanna tradition by Lingyats. Controversies followed him and so did the threats from conservative forces. The first one of which, was the publication of Marga treatise on Kannada folklore including articles on Virshaiva, Basavanna. Due to the death threats to him time and over again police protection was given. This police protection was withdrawn on his request recently. He supported U.R. Anathmurthy on the issue of stopping idol worship. When he invited VHP leaders and the pontiff of Vishveshra Tirtha Swami for a public debate; another controversy followed. His support to Karnataka bill against practices of superstition invited anger of Bajarang Dal and associate organizations and he had to face protest; where his effigy was burnt.

There is a pattern in the murders of Dabholkar, Pansare and Kalburgi. Though there are some differences in the broad range of field of their social engagement, the similarity is very striking. They were rational, they made their voice abundantly clear and many threats were received by them. Another stark similarity is that all these three murders took place in early mornings by those who came on motor cycles, one person driving the bike and the second one pumping bullets. Strangely despite a long lapse of time the killers of Dabholkar and Pansare have not been nabbed so far.

After the murder of Kalburgi one Bajrang Dal activist Bhuvith Shetty tweeted, ***"Then it was UR Ananthamurthy and now MM Kalburgi. Mock Hinduism and die dogs (sic.) death. And dear KS Bhagwan you are next" .*** This tweet was later withdrawn. Also many a person’s related to Hindu right wing organizations started saying that Kalburgi had insulted Hindu gods, so anger among Hindus and so such murders. This is a subtle justification of the intolerance which our society is being gripped with. As such the attitude of communal elements in different religions is very similar. One recalls the threat to Salman Rushdie, the type of intolerance shown to Taslima Nasreen and the murder of bloggers in Bangla Desh and also murder of Salman Taseer in Pakistan. Taseer had stood in defense of a Christian woman who was accused of blasphemy.

The opposition to the voices of reason has been going on in History all through. One can as well begin with Charvak, who opposed the Brahmanical understanding about the world, divine nature of Vedas in particular. Charvak said Vedas are manmade, social in nature, and was persecuted. Gradually with the power of clergy the imposition of faith on society became more institutionalized. Even teachings of Gautam Buddha, who was agnostic, and talked about the social nature of human problems, were attacked. This had led to the wiping out of Buddhism from India. The medieval Bhakti saints were also more for rational thinking, critical of the imposition of various social practices-rituals in the name of faith. Many saints like Tukaram in Maharashtra had to face persecution at the hands of those who were close to social power, the clergy.

Globally one can see the same pattern in Europe. In Europe the scientists, rational thinking had to face the opposition from organized Church, which condemned Galileo to hell for stating that the Earth is round etc. Similar was the fate of many scientists who had to face inquisitions and punishments of various types. Clergy hid behind the façade of ‘divine authority’: faith, and tried to stall the process of social change and halt the scientific thinking. The society over a period of time overcame the opposition to the rational thinking and so we saw the rooting of science and scientific inquiry. Clergy had maintained that they are the repository of whole knowledge; as knowledge is already there in our ‘Holy books’. This is a part generalization and it manifested in different cultures and religions in diverse ways. In Pakistan, some Maulanas asserted that the problems related to power can be solved by doing research on djinns, who are power houses of infinite energy; this was presented as part of the religious knowledge.

In India with freedom movement, those standing for social change and transformation did stand for rational thinking and critiqued the scriptures from that angle. The traditionalists, who wanted to retain the old social equations; resorted to ‘our glorious heritage of knowledge’. Faith based understanding was counterpoised against the spirit of scientific inquiry. With independence, with Nehru being at the helm of affairs, the notion of ‘scientific temper’ came up in a big way paving the way for establishment of institution of higher learning and research; leading to the national growth and transformation towards democratic structures. This was the time when the nation was looking forward to all round progress and rational thinking was duly promoted. The national science resolution; based on reason and logic was passed unanimously in 1958.

Things start changing in the decades of 1980s. The politics in the name of religion came up in a very assertive manner and faith not only continued to be the emotional support system in the times of social anxiety but some political forces started asserting identity politics, faith based politics. Identity issues and faith based politics started getting more legitimacy. The social conservatism and undermining of rational thought went hand in hand. Incidentally it is around this time also when the groups promoting rational thought, scientific temper, groups to oppose blind faith, came up. The most prominent of these groups was Kerala Sastra Sahitya Parishad. Later in Maharashtra Narendra Dabholkar took the lead to establish Andhshraddha Nirmulan Samiti (Committee to oppose Blind faith).

This took the Maharashtra conservative elements by storm as the volunteers of this organization started going from village to village and started demonstrating the science behind the magic tricks which were being practiced by hoards of God men and other of their tribe, who were taking full advantage of the social insecurity of poor villagers and exploiting them. Pansare, in addition to opposing blind faith was also disseminating the values of Shivaji, presenting him as a person respecting all religions, which Shivaji was. The right wingers could not stomach it; neither could they oppose the logical formulations presented by him. In Karnataka individual like U.R. Ananthmurthy articulated against idol worship and blind faith. Kalburgi not only supported U R Anathmurthy; he also went on the support the bill against the practices promoting blind faith. He did author papers/books to disseminate his ideas.

Slightly back in time when the first NDA Government came to power with Dr. Murli Manohar Joshi as the MHRD minister, he introduced the courses like ritualism (paurohitya) and astrology (jyotish shastra) in the universities. This gave a big boost to the ‘faith’ based groups who were politically close to the politics in the name of Hindu religion. With the new Government coming to power (2014) again now the mythology is being promoted as history, the Pushpak viman, ‘plastic surgery in ancient India’ etc. is being promoted; at the same time so called fringe elements, which as such are part of the Hindutva politics, are becoming more assertive. The liberal open space is shrinking and the place of debate is being taken by physical violence. The liberal values which accept the validity of differences is being eliminated by force, intimidation and even partly by state support. The murder of these ‘saintly’ figures , Dabholkar, Pansare and Klaburgi, just goes to show  that we are landing in a situation where those entrenched in the conservative values are becoming dominant and do not want the rational thinking to exist in our society.

The aggressive stance by the Hindutva right wing on those who are putting forward the rational thought, criticizing the ills of caste system, idol worship etc. is ideological supplement to the politics of Hindu right wing. The march of this politics in recent years has been built around identity issues like Ram temple or cow slaughter. Their whole assertion is built around the Brahmanical Hinduism, which upholds the caste hierarchy. The ideology being propounded by the likes of Dabholkar, Pansare and Kalburgi stands closer to the ideology for liberation from the caste hierarchy, which is the root of HIndutva politics. This politics does target the religious minorities, while ironically Hinduism is so diverse with contradictory tendencies within same religious umbrella. Kalburgi’s murder is part of the larger scheme of things where the ideologies opposed to the present status quo are being hounded along with persecution of those who are struggling to uphold these values.

On the other hand there has been a tremendous opposition to these brutal acts. The social groups upholding pluralism and rationalism have been agitating against these murders and the ideology of those involved in these killings.  Opposition of sections of society to the murders of Daholkar, Pansare and Kalburgi shows that there are still large numbers of people who are willing to uphold rational values and that gives a ray of hope for the times to come. In last couple of years after the murder of Dabholkar, various social groups have been coming together with a determination not only to oppose the intolerant conservative aggressive right wing politics, but also to take up the unfinished task of these slain pioneers committed to social change

Read More

Explained Series: Books and Exhibition on Communalism Explained and Terrorism Explained

Ram Puniyani

Friends,

Violence under the garb of religion has been the major expression of the politics in current times. Sharad Sharma, and myself are working on ‘Explained Series’. The aim of the series is to present the phenomenon in the form of graphic presentations, Comic Books. Two books in this series are already out

1. Communalism Explained: Outlines the rise of Communal politics in India, The communal violence, Mumbai and Gujarat as case studies, India’s syncretic traditions, the distortions in history done by British, Communal Historiography, The values of Freedom movement, the agenda of communal politics-Muslim and Hindu, Impact of communal agenda on the human rights of workers, women, dalits, Adivasis and religious minorities, the struggle for democratic society and tasks for secular movement (Rs 300)


2. Terrorism Explained. This book is in the background of 9/11 2001 WTC tragedy and goes on to unravel the politics of control of oil wells, the setting up of Madrassas in Pakistan by US for creation of Al Qaeda, The Terror attacks in India, 26/11 2008, The Hindutva terror, path for Peace. (Rs 200)

Both these are available on

www.explainedseries.com

Selections from these books have been put into a Exhibition (30 panels). This exhibition will soon be available in plastic folders for exhibitions in various places. At present it is in the form of thick print outs. These are in Hindi and English both.

Please click the following link for viewing the panels

English Link

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0ByRns_V0ePB5dlQyNkVwYy11SEE/edit?usp=sharing&pli=1

Hindi Link

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0ByRns_V0ePB5VlZIaTRWOVYxb00/edit?usp=sharing

Do please forward it to other friends and groups. Your feedback will be welcome.

Ram Puniyani

www.pluralindia.com

Response to

ram.puniyani@gmail.com

mail@worldcomicsindia.com

arthprakashan@gmail.com

Read More

Who Killed Narendra Dabholkar?

Ram Puniyani

The brutal killing of Dr. Narendra Dabholkar (20th August 2013) is a big jolt to the social movement against blind faith and superstitions. During last few decades the tendency for promotion of rational thought parallel to social change came up as Popular Science movement. In Maharashtra it took shape in the form of a movement, Andh Shraddha Nirmoolan Samiti (Committee for Eradication of Blind faith), where it became a powerful campaign for popular awareness, under the leadership of Dr. Narendra Dabholkar. There were those who were uncomfortable due to Dr. Dabholkar’s work against blind faith and superstitions and so he started getting threats to his life. Before his death he got several threats, one of which said, they will give him the same fate as that of Gandhi. After his killing Sanatan Prabhat, a Hindutva ideology paper, which constantly spew poison against him, commented that ‘one gets what one deserves’.

The practitioners and supporters of blind faith surely know that their art is a hoax, were sure that their blind magic can’t kill the pioneer of a rationalist movement, so they did hire assassins to kill Dabholkar. He was recipient of regular abuses from the Hindutva organization, Hindu Janjagruti Samiti, on their web posted claims that they have exposed anti Hindu conspiracy. In their publications they put across abuses for him in gay abandon, one of which read, ‘Dabholkar’s group” should permanently make their faces black for their misdeeds against Hindu religion.”

As such Dabholakar was not against religion or faith. He strongly condemned the practices of blind faith and superstitions, promoted and practiced by Babas and their ilk, who proactively practiced and propagated retrograde practices.  Some of these practices like and Karni, Bhanamati are the ones’ in which magical rites are performed in the name of supernatural power. Some other practices are like offering of ash, talisman, charms etc. for the purpose of exorcism and to drive out evil spirits or ghosts. These Godmen and their types claim to be in possession of supernatural powers and advertise this claim. Many a times they claim to be reincarnation of a particular Saint or God, and this way they cheat the gullible and God-fearing simple folks. They do perform so called black magic and spread fear in society. The act which Dabholkar was campaigning for, which the Government adopted after his assassination, makes such practices as an offence under this act. Just a reminder that when this act was first brought up for discussion BJP-Shiv Sean combine strongly opposed the same. He was critical of these irrational practices, and for this he was labeled to be anti Hindu.

Apart from these upholders of politics in the name of Hindu religion other conservatives were also against the activities carried out by his organization. Faith is a complicated phenomenon, true it is needed by a section of society. Faith in supernatural power, faith in institution built around the names of prophets and individuals operating in the name of some religion or God have to some extent provided an emotional support to many in this cruel World with gross deprivations and inequalities. Recognizing this weakness of humans many a religio-entrepreneurs have systematically converted the faith into blind faith, a series of rituals, acts, which are deliberately used to exploit the gullible.

The battle between these two tendencies is old enough. Reason on one side and faith on the other. Reason believes in questioning the existing beliefs and to keep going beyond the prevalent knowledge. Faith, particularly the one constructed around the ‘institutions of religion’ begins with unquestioning subservience to the prevalent norms, beliefs and rituals. Many individuals who go in to establish their enterprises around these rituals, claim to be having divine powers. Incidentally, most of the founders of religions, the prophets, had questioning mind and they questioned the existing norms, values and practices. It is precisely for this that many of them were tormented and punished by the powers that ruled. The clergy, which built institutions around the names of these prophets or supernatural powers, developed rituals in the names of these prophets. The clergy and their practices were most static. Such tendency promotes status quo not only of knowledge but also of social situations and relations.  Clergy promoted the social status quo and so demanded unquestioning loyalty to their interpretation of religion and social norms as dictated by them.

There are many incidents in the history, where those who came up with rational thought were not only killed but sometimes harassed to no end. We know the fate of Charvak in India, who questioned the supernatural authorities of Vedas, he was condemned, and his writings were burnt. In Europe, Copernicus and Galileo’s plight at the hand of clergy is another chapter, while the scientists like Bruno, Servatus who argued that diseases are due to Worldly reasons and not due to the wrath of God, were burnt alive by the machinations of clergy. The idea here was very simple, if people start understanding that the diseases are due to bacteria or other etiological factors, the earlier practices of pleasing God through the clergy for healing will come to a halt and clergy’s social power will decline.

In India as the secularization process, the land reforms plus reduction of the hold of clergy remained incomplete, the power of clergy in social field continued. Indian Constitution talks of promotion of scientific temper and people like Nehru kept promoting the inculcation of this scientific temper. Meanwhile the political tendencies operating in the name of religion, kept opposing scientific, rational thinking and kept uncritically glorifying the ancient past, ancient practices cultivated by the clergy to exploit the gullible society, society in the grip of uncertainty and deprivation.

India did witness the rational movements to promote the scientific temper, but its impact in the society remained marginal. With the rise of communal politics from the decade of 1980, the blind faith took a massive leap with hoards of Babas and acharyas, setting up their religious enterprises, enterprises which probably turned out to be most profitable by any standard. One hopes that the business schools are able to calculate the returns on the investments in such enterprises some day. In addition many such Babas extracted the additional bonus of physical pleasures of another kind, the way currently Asaram Bapu is being accused of and so many of them have had their fill. In a crass manner many of the small and high level players also incorporated magical tricks like producing ash and gold from nowhere as their trademark of divine powers. It is these tricks which were being exposed by Dabholkar’s groups. 

The practitioners of blind faith and these hoards of five-seven star babas, get their legitimacy and appreciation from leaders of different hues. While those coming from RSS stable are firmly with them at all the levels, even politicians from other tendencies also personally support and follow these tricksters, Babas, Godmen and their whole tribe. The communalists stand to support them ideologically the way Sanatan Sanstha, while abusing Dabholkar also talked of his work being ‘anti Hindu’! A similar trickster, Benny Hynn did public performances for faith healing, and there is no dearth of the ‘Baba Bangali’ series indulging in such trade.

It took Dabholkar’s sacrifice for Mahrashtra Government to pass and bill against blind faith for which Daholkar was struggling from decades. He had collected data that it is women who are the biggest victims of those practicing black magic. He had been talking of taking on the highly rewarding trade of gems and their magic powers, in due course. Alas, that was not to be! Will other state Governments follow suit and try to bring a control on the flourishing trade of blind faith, black magic and its ilk? Will the progressive social movement take up the cause of the major victims of these abominable practices and take the society forward to the path of rational thought, rational culture and rational politics, away from the trappings of the faith based blindness. While our ‘scientific establishment’ has made giant strides the scientific thinking still lags behind as science is being practiced mostly as an instrument and not as a way of life. That’s how in many of science and technology institutions, on Dussera day, computers are worshipped with flowers and by putting vermillion on the forehead of the monitors! Can sacrifice of Dabholar wake up our policy makers to such a serious lacuna in our teaching and practice of science? We seem to have liked the benefits of technology and have been undermining the scientific way of thought and practice, more so after the politics-nationalism has started wearing the cloak of religion.

Read More

Resist Anti-Scientific Temper Forces: A Statement by Intellectuals & Activists

We the scientist, rationalists, educators and intellectuals of the country learnt with shock and anger the brutal and inhuman murder of Dr Narendra Dabholkar. This murder is part of the series of attacks that have been perpetrated by anti scientific temper forces in the country. The attacks on artists, intellectuals and rationalists, all over the country, have increased exponentially.

Dr Dabholkar, a legendry figure in Maharashtra had contributed significantly to spreading scientific temper and spirit of enquiry. We strongly feel that it is duty of every citizen in the country to unequivocally condemn his murder. His noteworthy, untiring and courageous contribution in framing the ‘anti-superstition and black magic bill’, that is pending before the Maharashtra Assembly speaks volumes about his attitude towards fulfilling the constitutional duty. His murder is an attack on the fundamentals of our constitution.

The atmosphere of intolerance and anti-science attitude is sweeping the Indian sub-continent. It is created by those vested interests, which benefit from spreading myths and superstitions. There is a deliberate plot to push our society towards fanaticism.

On March 13, 1958, Pt. Nehru, the first Prime Minister of India placed ‘Scientific Policy Resolution’ before the Parliament of the country and read the entire document and had hoped that science ‘has provided new tools of thought’ which will ‘expand the mental horizon’. He had also hoped that science will influence the basic values of life and give the Indian civilization and new vitality and a new dynamism. The opposition had demanded a discussion; every speaker endorsed the resolution and raised concerns to strengthen it. The debate is a witness to the commitment that our parliamentarians of the time had towards eradicating myths and superstitions from our society. They had also recognized how difficult the task was.

Today we have come a long way, instead of debating and endorsing a bill that calls for eradication of superstitions, a person who pushes it in the assembly is killed in broad daylight. Those who killed Dr Dabholkar are scared of who hold rationality, independent thinking, questioning, and skepticism.

India, which has a long tradition of skepticism, humanism and spirit of enquiry, is facing a situation where anti-scientific temper forces apparently loom large. We call upon all those who stand by the constitution to rise and rededicate ourselves to spreading scientific temper.

We demand:

The perpetrators of this ghastly act should be immediately arrested, brought to the book and punished as per law of the land.

The anti-superstition and black magic bill should be passed immediately by Maharashtra Assembly.

A similar bill should be drafted, discussed and passed by the parliament of the country.

- Dr. Ram Puniyani, Gauhar Raza, Dinesh Abrol, Amitabh Pandey, Prof. IrfanHabib, Dr.Subodh Mahanti, Dr TV Venkateswaran, Dr Surjit Singh.

20 August 2013

Read More

Promoting Scientific Temper – A Letter to the Chairman, ISRO

Nikhil Joshi

We reproduce an email Dr. Nikhil Joshi sent (on 17 September 2012) to the Chairman of Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) after witnessing the nauseating spectacle of none other than the ISRO Chairman himself carrying a replica of PSLV-C21 (Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle - C21) to a hill shrine at Tirupati and placing it in front of the presiding deity of the temple praying for its successful launch! : carvaka4india

Sir,

I protest against ISRO Chairman K Radhakrishnan and Directer of Vikram Sarabhai Space Center, S Veeraraghavan for their actions against the constitutional duty of Article 51Ah according to which, every Indian citizen is expected to promote scientific temper.

It is a petty matter when an ailing patient or a failing student prays god. However, it is a grave national disgrace when persons of elite stature such as yours stoop to the level of commoners to pray at Saibaba Temple or Lord Venkateswara Temple for professional success. I wonder if you spent for the travel and worship expenses from your own pockets. I also wonder if your absence from duty for a purpose that is against your fundamental duty should be considered as 'a break in service' and those leaves of absence should be considered as 'un-paid leaves' and all consequent dues should be recovered from you. It is also disgrace to the global community of engineers and scientists on whose behalf you (S Veeraraghavan) have audaciously claimed that "We scientists and engineers do our best and leave rest to the God".

Scientific temper is a greater, more important and independent skill than tech savviness or science literacy. God has no place in science. It is part of your professional responsibility to guide India out of the superstitions, gullibility and faiths that have riddled our country, especially with greater penetration after 1990.

In these actions, you have caused more damage to India than the monetary benefits from the success of PSLV-C21, by setting a wrong example to follow for people, regarding desired attitude towards faith. I wish that you repent your actions and strive to undo the damage done by you to the public psyche.

By the way, as an aside, have you ever considered blaming your gods (and claiming damage recovery from the temple trust authorities) when some of the earlier Indian rockets failed?

  

ISRO chief offers worship at shrine ahead of PSLV-C21 launch

Tirupati, Sept 7, 2012, (PTI):

PSLV
Courtesy: Wikipedia

Ahead of India's landmark 100th space mission, ISRO Chairman K Radhakrishanan today offered worship at the hill shrine of Lord Venkateswara near here praying for its successful launch.

Radhakrishanan is a frequent visitor to the over 2000-year-old shrine before every mission, temple sources said.

The mission, in which a 720-kg SPOT-6 remote sensing satellite from France (built by ASTRIUM SAS) and a 15-kg Japanese spacecraft PROITERES would be placed in orbit by ISRO's PSLV-C21 on Sunday from Sriharikota, will be witnessed by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

A replica of PSLV-C21 carried in a bag by the ISRO Chief was placed at the feet of the presiding deity for a while by temple priests, the sources said.

(Deccan Herald. Bangalore

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/277108/isro-chief-offers-worship-shrine.html 

Accessed on September 18, 2012)

Read More

The Community of Reason, a Self-Assessment and a Manifesto

Massimo Pigliucci

My experience (anecdotal, yes, but ample and varied) has been that there is quite a bit of un-reason within the Community of Reason (henceforth, CoR). This takes the form of more or less widespread belief in scientific, philosophical and political notions that don’t make much more sense than the sort of notions we — within the community — are happy to harshly criticize in others. Yes, you might object, but that’s just part of being human, pretty much every group of human beings holds to unreasonable beliefs, why are you so surprised or worried? Well, because we think of ourselves — proudly! — as a community of reason, where reason and evidence are held as the ultimate arbiters of any meaningful dispute. To find out that too often this turns out not to be the case is a little bit like discovering that moral philosophers aren’t more ethical than the average guy (true).

Massimo Pigliucci - Courtesy: Wikipedia

What am I talking about? Here is a (surely incomplete, and I’m even more sure, somewhat debatable) list of bizarre beliefs I have encountered among fellow skeptics-atheists-humanists. No, I will not name names because this is about ideas, not individuals (but heck, you know who you are...). The list, incidentally, features topics in no particular order, and it would surely be nice if a sociology student were to conduct a systematic research on this for a thesis...

• Assorted nonsense about alternative medicine. Despite excellent efforts devoted to debunking “alternative” medicine claims, some atheists especially actually endorse all sorts of nonsense about “non-Western” remedies.
• Religion is not a proper area of application for skepticism, according to some skeptics. Why on earth not? It may not be a suitable area of inquiry for science, but skepticism — in the sense of generally applied critical thinking — draws on more than just science (think philosophy, logic and math).
• Philosophy is useless armchair speculation. So is math. And logic. And all theoretical science.
• The notion of anthropogenic global warming has not been scientifically established, something loudly proclaimed by people who — to the best of my knowledge — are not atmospheric physicists and do not understand anything about the complex data analysis and modeling that goes into climate change research.
• Science can answer moral questions. No, science can inform moral questions, but moral reasoning is a form of philosophical reasoning. The is/ought divide may not be absolute, but it is there nonetheless.
• Science has established that there is no consciousness or free will (and therefore no moral responsibility). No, it hasn’t, as serious cognitive scientists freely admit. Notice that I am not talking about the possibility that science has something meaningful to say about these topics (it certainly does when it comes to consciousness, and to some extent concerning free will, if we re-conceptualize the latter as the human ability of making decisions). I am talking about the dismissal-cum-certainty attitude that so many in the CoR have so quickly arrived at, despite what can be charitably characterized as a superficial understanding of the issue.
• Determinism has been established by science. Again, wrong, not only because there are interpretations of quantum mechanics that are not deterministic, but because a good argument can be made that that is simply not the sort of thing science can establish (nor can anything else, which is why I think the most reasonable position in this case is simple agnosticism).
• Evolutionary psychology is on epistemic par with evolutionary biology. No, it isn’t, for very good and well understood reasons pertinent to the specific practical limitations of trying to figure out human selective histories. Of course, evopsych is not a pseudoscience, and it’s probably best understood as a science-informed narrative about the human condition.
• The Singularity is near! I have just devoted a full column for Skeptical Inquirer (in press) to why I think this amounts to little more than a cult for nerds. But it is a disturbingly popular cult within the CoR.
• Objectivism is (the most rational) philosophy according to a significant sub-set of skeptics and atheists (not humanists, since humanism is at complete odds with Randianism). Seriously, people? Notice that I am not talking about libertarianism here, which is a position that I find philosophically problematic and ethically worrisome, but is at least debatable. Ayn Rand’s notions, on the other hand, are an incoherent jumble of contradictions and plagiarism from actual thinkers. Get over it.
• Feminism is a form of unnecessary and oppressive liberal political correctness. Oh please, and yet, rather shockingly, I have heard this “opinion” from several fellow CoRers.
• Feminists are right by default and every attempt to question them is the result of oppressive male chauvinism (even when done by women). These are people who clearly are not up on readings in actual feminism (did you know that there have been several waves of it? With which do you best connect?).
• All religious education is child abuse, period. This is a really bizarre notion, I think. Not only does it turn 90% of the planet into child abusers, but people “thinking” (I use the term loosely) along these lines don’t seem to have considered exactly what religious education might mean (there is a huge variety of it), or — for that matter — why a secular education wouldn’t be open to the same charge, if done as indoctrination (and if it isn’t, are you really positive that there are no religious families out there who teach doubt? You’d be surprised!).
• Insulting people, including our close allies, is an acceptable and widespread form of communication with others. Notice that I am not talking about the occasional insult hurled at your opponent, since there everyone is likely a culprit from time to time (including yours truly). I am talking about engaging in apologia on behalf of a culture of insults. 

The point of this list, I hasten to say, is not that the opinions that I have expressed on these topics are necessarily correct, but rather that a good number of people in the CoR, including several leaders of the movement(s), either hold to clearly unreasonable opinions on said topics, or cannot even engage in a discussion about the opinions they do hold, dismissing any dissenting voice as crazy or irrelevant.

As you can see, the above is a heterogeneous list that includes scientific notions, philosophical concepts, and political positions. What do the elements of this list have in common, if anything? A few things, which is where I hope the discussion is going to focus (as opposed to attempting to debunk one’s pet entry, or deny that there is a problem to begin with).

A)    Anti-intellectualism. This is an attitude of lack of respect for the life of the mind and those who practice it. It may be strange to claim that members — and even some leaders — of the CoR engage in anti-intellectualism, but the evidence is overwhelming. When noted biologists or physicists in the movement dismiss an entire field of intellectual pursuit (philosophy) out of hand they are behaving in an anti-intellectual manner. When professional “skeptics” tell us that they don’t buy claims of anthropogenic global warming, they are being anti-intellectual because they are dismissing the work of thousands of qualified scientists. To be more precise here, I think there are actually two separate sub-issues at play:

A1) Scientism. This is the pernicious tendency to believe that science is the only paragon of knowledge and the ultimate arbiter of what counts as knowledge. And the best way to determine if you are perniciously inclined toward scientism is to see whether you vigorously deny its existence in the community.

A2) Anti-intellectualism proper. This is the thing on display when “skeptics” reject even scientific findings, as in the above mentioned case of global warming.

B)     The “I’m-smarter-than-thou” syndrome. Let’s admit it, skepticism does have a way to make us feel intellectually superior to others. They are the ones believing in absurd notions like UFOs, ghosts, and the like! We are on the side of science and reason. Except when we aren’t, which ought to at least give us pause and enroll in the nearest hubris-reducing ten-step program.

C)    Failure of leadership. It is hard to blame the rank and files of the CoR when they are constantly exposed to such blatant and widespread failure of leadership within their own community. Gone are, it seems, the days of the Carl Sagans, Martin Gardners, and Bertrand Russells, and welcome to the days of bloggers and twitterers spouting venom or nonsense just because they can.

Where does this leave us? Well, for one thing — at this very moment — probably with a lot of pissed off people! But once the anger subsides, perhaps we active members of the CoR can engage in some “soul” searching and see if we can improve our own culture, from the inside.

To begin with, are there positive models to look up to in this endeavor? Absolutely, and here I will name names, though the following list is grossly incomplete, both for reasons of space and because some names just happened not to come to mind at the moment I was typing these words. If you are not listed and you should be, forgive me and let’s amend the problem in the discussion thread. So here we go: Sean Carroll, Dan Dennett, Neil deGrasse Tyson, D.J. Groethe, Tim Farley, Ken Frazier (and pretty much anyone else who writes for Skeptical Inquirer, really), Ron Lindsey, Hemant Metha, Chris Mooney, Phil Plaitt, Steve Novella (as well as the other Novellas), John Rennie, Genie Scott, Michael Shermer, Carl Zimmer, and many, many more.

Do I have any practical suggestions on how to move the CoR forward, other than to pay more attention to what the people just mentioned say, and perhaps a little less attention to what is spouted by some others who shall go unmentioned? At the risk of sounding somewhat immodest, yes, I do. Here are a few to get us started (again, discussion on how to improve the list will be most welcome). Once again, the order is pretty much random:

i) Turn on moderation on all your blogs, this will raise the level of discourse immediately by several orders of magnitude, at the cost of a small inconvenience to you and your readers.

ii) Keep in mind the distinction between humor and sarcasm, leave the latter to comedians, who are supposed to be offending people. (In other words, we are not all Jon Stewarts or Tim Minchins.)

iii) Apply the principle of charity, giving the best possible interpretation of someone else’s argument before you mercilessly dismantle it. (After which, by all means, feel free to go ahead and mercilessly dismantle it.)

iv) Engage your readers and your opponents in as civil a tone as you can muster. Few people deserve to be put straight into insult mode (Hitler and Pat Robertson come to mind).

v) Treat the opinions of experts in a given domain with respect, unless your domain of expertise is reasonably close to the issue at hand. This doesn’t mean not criticizing experts or worshipping their pronouncements, but only to avoid anti-intellectualism while doing it.

vi) Read more philosophy, it will do you a world of good. (I am assuming that if you are a member of the CoR you already do read quite a bit of science. If not, why are you here?)

vii) Pick the right role models for your skeptics pantheon (suggestions above, people to avoid are left to your keen intuition).

viii) Remember what the objectives are: to learn from exposing your ideas to the cross-criticism of others and in turn help others learn to think better. Objectives do not include showing the world how right and cool you are.

ix) Keep in mind that even the very best make mistakes and occasionally endorse notions that turn out to be wrong. How is it possible that you are the only exception to this rule?

(We at www.carvaka4india.com reproduce this article by Prof Massimo Pigluicci as the points raised by the author seem to us to be relevant to Indian activists as well. Those who are following our blog may be familiar with Prof Pigluicci's writings as from the day we launched our blog, we have provided  a permanent link to his blog: 

Reproduced with the consent of  http://rationallyspeaking.blogspot.in/)

Read More

A Code of Conduct for Rationalists

Prabhakar Kamath*

A rationalist’s approach to educating the deluded masses should be rational and not emotional.

Dr Prabhakar Kamath

Many rationalists are so incensed by the behavior of the religious fanatics that they become emotional in their retort. Emotional reaction invariably diminishes the logic of the rationalist. Very often the rationalists have their own emotional baggage, which comes in the way of calm, rational approach to addressing this problem.

A rationalist should have been born in the same religion that he wants to reform or undermine.

A Hindu rationalist cannot reason with a Muslim religionist and vice versa. His wisdom will be immediately discounted by virtue of the fact that he is of another religion.

For a rationalist to succeed in converting fanatics of his former religion, he must first show his authority on the scriptures of that religion, which are the basis of irrational beliefs and rituals.

The authority to change other people’s beliefs comes only to those people who have demonstrated high level of knowledge on the subject they are talking about. If the rationalist knows little about the scriptures, those who claim to know more than him would discount his ideas. A “Brahmin” rationalist who has mastered the scriptures has far better chance of showing the fraud of scriptures than a non-Brahmin who does not even have a rudimentary knowledge of them. It took Gorbachov, an ultimate insider, to topple Communism in Russia. It took Nixon, an ultimate conservative, to change the attitude of Americans toward Chinese.  One has to be an insider to show the irrationality of a given religion.

A rationalist must undermine the scriptures by giving concrete examples of fraud by vested interests, not just being dismissive of them off hand.

More often than not, a rationalist just gives his opinion about the wrongfulness of the delusion of religious people. This means he is entitled to his opinion and the religionist is entitled to his. End of progress.

A rationalist should resort to Constitutional measures to bring the fanatics to justice when they indulge in hateful behavior towards dissidents.

Deluded fanatics are obviously irrational people whose Constitution is their religion. They are living in the past. Religion was the Constitution (LAW, DHARMA) in the ancient times. Now we have a Constitution of the Nation, applicable to all religions. Rationalist’s approach should be strictly Constitutional and rational.

Dr. Prabhakar Kamath is a psychiatrist currently practicing in the U.S. This article was first published in Bangalore Skeptic (an ezine, now defunct) in 2009.  We reproduce the article as it seems to be still relevant.  Dr Kamth has written a series of articles from a skeptical point of view. You can read them here:

http://nirmukta.com/author/prabhakar-kamath/ 

Read More

A Landmark Judgement

Ramesh Nagaragere        

This commentary on the Judgement delivered by the High Court of Karnataka was published in the October 2010 issue of Indian Skeptic, an ezine now defunct. We upload the essay as the judgement continues to be relevant to the rationalist movement in India.

There have been occasions when Indian judiciary has surprised, shocked and disappointed people who expected it to pass verdicts which would take the society forward. One well known case in point is the judgement given out by the Rajasthan high court against Bhanvari Devi in 1994 saying that those who had been accused of raping her were from the upper castes and hence could not have done such a heinous deed and acquitted all of them.

High Court of Karnataka

But now and then we come across some silver linings creating some hope in us about the efficacy and forward looking nature of the judges. I refer to the judgement announced by Justice H N Nagamohan Das of the High Court of Karnataka on 13th September, 2010. At one stroke he quashed the non bailable warrant issued by a lower court against Mr Hulikal Nataraj for 'hurting the Hindu sentiments' by criticizing and talking against some dearly held beliefs of many Hindus. This is surely a land mark judgement since it belongs to that group of decisions of learned judges like Justice VR Krishna Iyer. This emboldens and strengthens the hands of those who have been fighting against obscurantism and superstition which are still respected in this society since they are our 'tradition'.

Now, for the details of the case. Mr Nataraj teaches at Swami Vivekananda Higher Primary School, Doddaballapur some 35 kms away from Bangalore, He is well known for his acts of exposing the miracles, a programme popularised in Karnataka and in many other parts of India by Dr Narendra Naik. On 26th February at one such programme at Madikeri in Coorg district of Karnataka, he is said to have explained the dubious nature of Makara Vilakku and the case of an eagle going round the Garuda Stambha at Ayyappa temple of Shabarimala. (It could me be mentioned here that some time ago, one of the trustees of Ayyappa temple admitted that the so-called divine JYOTHI WAS ONLY A HUMAN CREATION.) He is also said to have called the so called theerthobhava at Bhagamandala, the sudden springing up of water in the river Kaveri as ‘false’. The next day, on 27th February a complaint was lodged against him by one Chethan, an activist   of Bhajarangadal of Madikeri with the police of the town. The charge was that Mr. Nataraj, by calling these phenomena false had hurt Hindu sentiments. The police registered a case against him, filed it in the court of the magistrate at Madikeri and a non-bailable warrant was issued against the accused. This act on the part of the police and the court at Madikeri did cause some furore at that time and was forgotten later.

Karnataka was reminded of this case again on 13th September, 2010 when the press reported that the case against Mr Natara was quashesd by the High Court judge Justice H N Nagamohan Das.  Mr.  Nataraj had challenged the order of the Madikeri court in the High Court of Karnataka and his case was argued by the well known Advocate Prof Ravi Varma Kumar and his assistant Mr Irshad Ahmad.

Especially noteworthy is the extent of intellectual efforts put forth by the Judge to build up a case for acquitting Mr Nataraj. The text of the judgement reads like a treatise on rationalism and scientific temper. The constitutional obligation of every citizen of India to uphold and promote scientific temper and a spirit of enquiry without which no society can ever dream of moving in the direction of progress is also mentioned to support his decision.  The most surprising thing is that the importance of Section 51 A(h) of Indian Constitution which addressed this issue was lost on the  police officer  as well as the judge at Madikeri.

Hulikkal Nataraj

Justice Nagamohan Das divides the text into five parts of which three are devoted to a delineation of the issue at hand, Under titles such as FREEDOM OF SPEECH, SUPERSTITIONS, and FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES,  he traces the growth of the spirit of inquiry among humans every where. The very first sentence, almost axiomatic, sets out the direction and tone the whole text was to follow: 'UNFREEDOM is the result of oppression and freedom is the outcome of liberation'. The learned judge cites various verdicts of the English, American and Indian seats of justice in this regard in support of his arguement. The words of Justice Frankfurter in the case DENNIS   Vs. UNITED STATES (34 US 494(1951) are very much relevant in the present context when we are still plagued by those swearing in the name of cultural nationalism and superstitions calling them parts of a glorious tradition, '....the liberty of man to search for truth ought not to be fettered, no matter what orthodoxies may challenge. Liberty of thought soon shrivels without freedom of expression '.

The judge also quotes extensively thinkers like Buddha, Basaveswara, Nehru and Dr Radhakrishnan to uphold the importance of being open minded. He rightly notes that scientific temper takes one beyond Science and 'creates a conducive atmosphere to eradicate class discrimination, slavery, bonded labour, untouchability, gender discrimination and racial discrimination'.  He also points out that when a citizen is threatened for discharging his fundamental duty of promoting scientific temper he/she can approach the court for a direction to the government to protect him/her from any harm.

The text of the judgement reveals how the complainant from Bhajarangdal and the police officer have bungled in their interpretation of the words 'wounding the religious feelings’ of Hindus. Similarly it also notes that the judicial officer at Madikeri has gone about the case in a 'mechanical manner'.  Finally on the basis of all these findings, all grounded on rationalism, progressive thinking and commitment to the spirit of the Indian Constitution, the learned judge quashes the order of the lower court and discharges Mr Nataraj of all charges.

With a judgement of this importance, notwithstanding some unease, Iyer and Nagamohan Das stand tall among hundreds of judicial functionaries, many of whom, unfortunately, are not very much different from the judge of the Rajastah High Court already referred to. The victory of Mr Nataraj is not merely a personal gain but it is the victory of scientific thinking and rationalism over irrationalism and of democracy over fascism.

Read More