Saturday 24 March 2018

Burning Books.

Burning Manu Smriti has become a mandatory exercise. I have nothing for or against it, not having read it. I know it has some objectionable verses, but so does the Koran.
I would never burn the Koran, and so I think burning the Manu Smriti is also maybe incorrect.
Comments
Satheesh Kumar Burning any book is wrong in all counts.

1
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Aparna Krishnan I also think so.

1
Manage


Like
Reply1y



Aparna Krishnan (via Mark Johnston, and I agree). I am ignorant of so much of the local background to this. My ill informed view is that protest, which may include the destruction of goods, is a perfectly acceptable tool to use as part of our efforts to protect locallivelihoods and cultures against the imposition of foreign goods and unfair tariffs by corporations and governments. I find much that I cannot personally condone in every dogmatically held belief system whether political or religious that I have so far come across. However much I trust in my own causes and world view I believe that it would be neither right nor constructive to burn books relating to deeply help beliefs by others. It would be hard to find examples in history where book burning has led to significant improvements in the ways that we treat each other.
Unlike · Reply · 1 · 4 mins · Edited

1
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Narayana Sarma Smrithis were social dictates which possibly are our only linkages to Ancient society and its laws: like..- history books? I do not know if anything is achieved by burning them. History can not be erased by burning a book anyway. And now hardly anyone follows Manu smriti so burning its copy means nothing. I have not read it and have no interest in reading it either.

1
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Aparna Krishnan All this burning seems drama value, I am sorry to say. Almost partyingt in a mob. I might have some activists on me like a ton of bricks for saying that - but I think the activists worth their salt act beyond and deeper than book burnings. Naren and Balagopal probably did not go burning books.

1
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Narayana Sarma true.
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Aparna Krishnan Then why did Ambedkar ? To take people along ?
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Aparna Krishnan Like Gandhi took people along by saying 'all spin and wear khadi' !
Manage


Like
Reply1yEdited
Narayana Sarma Gandhi, Ambedkar, Nehru, Tilak- all these are super politicians with their own very special trademark programmes. Gandh is gone, Ambedkar will continue for some time, and Bhagat singhs and Netajis will come up time and again. Presently Mayawathis, Chandrababus, Rahul gyandis, Modis, students, professors, writers -and practically anyone- can talk anything, do anything, and get away with everything 

1
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Aparna Krishnan Yes, but like the politicians with pea-sized brains made khadi wear a tokenism, similarly Manusmriti has been reduced to tokenism by those on that side.
Manage


Like
Reply1y



Mankanwaldeep Rampal Burn any book(as a show of protest against wrong, although this again will cause pollution<again bad side>) as long as it's digitized version is available on internet OR it is not an original handwritten historical textbook copy OR it isn't being used to incite communal violence . 
No to blasphemy laws similar to that of K.S.A, Pakistan.
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Sailesh Bhupalam to prevent pollution, we should just download that book and delete it. Book deletion 

1
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Mankanwaldeep Rampal Sailesh Bhupalam - That too may come under Blasphemy law.
Manage


Like
Reply1y



Amitabh Nigam Those who burn books are not competent to write their own counter-opinion, so in a sense it is an act of cowardice. As much as eliminating your adversary by illegal methods.
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Aparna Krishnan I will tag you in another thread on this !
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Sailesh Bhupalam burning books is not the same as banning them. It is symbolic and the utility as assumed here is neither that they want to destroy literature because they don't know how to respond to it, nor that they don't want anybody to read it. In fact people who burn books want to bring attention to what's written there. 
I don't know whether book burning in itself is intrinsically wrong, probably my maturity and experience are not sufficient to come to such conclusions, but as far as i know, it is an act of symbolism to bring attention to something. Not an act under passion, unlike burning buses or shops, not to suppress dissent unlike Nazi mass book burning brigade.
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Aparna Krishnan Will tag you also !

1
Manage


Like
Reply1y



Altab Hossain Who's burning it?
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Aparna Krishnan every group which wants some immediate Action 
Manage


Like
Reply1y



Harish Chandra Ambedkar too burned it. If many people like him opposed it certainly their must be some wrong in that book
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Sundaramoorthy Olaganathan Certainly the book contains lot of unjust and discriminatory dispensations..but this is the justice of that time when the society was organised on a strict immutable hierarchical system and naturally the hiers of the oppressed in that system nurse a grievance and anger towards that. Buring the smirthi is symbolic of their resistance. A smirthi a proceedure code and there are few codes like manu some of them have gone out of operation due to macro changes in the then society.all along the religious heads have given imterpretation for proceedures based on shastras and the smrithi itself was evolving as per the needs of time.

1
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Aparna Krishnan Yes, I also wondered how many religious people actually feel a sense of belonging to the Manu Smriti ! Smritis are for that yuga. In general I would think burning of any religious text Koran or Gita is avoidable. There would be other ways. Would Gandhi have approved of burning books ?
Manage


Like
Reply2mEdited
Sundaramoorthy Olaganathan Gandhi as vivekananda thought that indian spirituality and religion had many praiseworthy things than condemnable things..and both of them have more messages and contributions for world peace and harmony. All the cited evils of hindu society not inherent but encrustations that could be clensed with a collective strong will without distrupting the edifice. For them a system can sustain itself by rediscovering and redefining itself in an ongoimg proceess. So no question of burning a set of evolvable texts..
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Aparna Krishnan and what would you say ?
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Sundaramoorthy Olaganathan It is immaterial to me..i have been a believer and supporter of various social and political philosophies at every stage of my life believing a particular one is correct at a particular time. Some philosophies were diametrically opposite to the previous ones that thought correct. That does not mean i have to burn those in which i have lost faith..let it remain..for those people who are keen to burn it..let them burn so that their wish or ego is satisfied. Burning unwanted texts is not a new phenomenon..we have seen burning a part of a constitution as a resentment to hindi imposition, burning of kambaramayan or periapuranam by periyar and annadurai as resistence to their percieved aryan culture and caste discrimination..breaking vinayaka idols has not stopped the mushrooming of ganesh temples and burning ramayan has not prevented it being a part of tamil text book for its excellent diction and sonorous language flows.i
Even annadurai had to acknowledging the work genius of kamban to erect a statue in comomeration in the world tamil Conference. My point is these gimmicks are meant for attention catching and counterproductive in the long run..it is so insigficant that does not deserve my attention

1
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Aparna Krishnan i agree. still i feel that in any dialogue, it is essential to maintain a certian protocol. The Gita or the Ramayana or the Koran should not be burnt as to many simple people it is sacred for all it indicates to them. Manusmriti may be a more specific - I do not know its contents fully.
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Sundaramoorthy Olaganathan See..the purpose of incendiarists is not engaging in a worthwhile dialogue where the parties have to follow some agreed protocols..they are keen to whip up passion and anger in the ideological opponents to obtain only a shock value..
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Aparna Krishnan does it help ?
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Sundaramoorthy Olaganathan I do no know..

1
Manage


Like
Reply1y



Ramanan Jagannathan Any Smrithi is mutable and there is nothing final about it .

1
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Ananda Ganesh I have read Manu Smriti. There is nothing objectionable in it.
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Aparna Krishnan No, that particular shloka is problematic.
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Aparna Krishnan But then the Gita also has a couple here and there.
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Ananda Ganesh I have read the entire book. It is usually out of context misquotes and misinterpretations that cause negative opinion.
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Ananda Ganesh I will try to clarify about any of the controversial sloka. Either in manu smriti or in bhagavad gita.
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Ananda Ganesh If I have misunderstood them as benign, then I will correct my misunderstanding.
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Aparna Krishnan Just check the manusmiti shloka ambedkar quoted. it is problematic. but smritis are located in a different time, and need to be adapted and corrected.
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Ananda Ganesh Ambedkar is a lier and fraud. The one Ambedkar quoted about pouring lead in the ears, etc., does not exist in manu smriti.
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Amit Bhatnagar Dont use such derogatory language mr anand ganesh. you may be much well read but dont get abusive. contradict ambedkar on what he said or did. this is not the way. poor taste.
Manage


Like
Reply1y
Aparna Krishnan But I have realised that in educated circles noise, and often rather abusive noise, is what passes for dialogue. One section calls the other libtards and sickulars. The other says chaddi-wallahs. I would cuff them both if I were their school teacher - as it is iI simply clear out from both parties. The average Indian in villages is deeply cultured and civilized, and anyway his framework is neither the rigid Left or Right. The village paradigm suits me.
Manage


Like
Reply1yEdited
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)