Friday, 23 August 2013

The Saas–Bahu Dramas in Our Living Rooms

HANSRAJ AND KASTHURBHA JAIN

“The problem we face today with marriages is that our 21st-century women are marrying 18th-century men!” Dr Justice Malimath (Retd)

If we just look at the magazines, books and the daily newspapers, these tell us very explicitly that Indian families and marriages, particularly of the middle class, are increasingly under stress and pressure. In fact, if we are honest, we will admit that these key institutions of our society are in some serious trouble. There is a rise in separations, divorces, suicides, murders, abuse and bride price. Added to these are issues such as female foeticides, abortion, premarital sex, extramarital sex, live-in relationships and dowry
A closer analysis of the situation seems to present to us that the greatest victims of all of this are the new families. And the reasons are that most of these families live in situations where very little, if any, support system exists.
As a result most of these young people turn to their peers, colleagues and friends for help. These advisers in turn dispense answers that are often founded on a little more than a personal sense of adventure and “exploration”. They operate from a discovery mode founded on a lot of presumptions and assumptions, emotional rationalizations, beliefs derived from their hearsay. These then are used to offer “workable” answers to the hurting individual or couple.
As for the elders among these advisers, well, they have advice borrowed from exposure to traditional norms. From them one would hear statements such as “in my time…” or  “when I was of your age…” 
We must, of course, recognize that all intentions are noble though not all advice is. Such unprofessional advice may even border on the ridiculous or, worse still, be downright dangerous

Over the years as we have interacted with families and couples and observed how our Indian culture is practiced, we have become increasingly aware that today’s mothers behave in almost exactly the same way that their own mothers and/or mothers-in-law once did. They are directive and dictatorial. They have put on the same big bossy shoes!
We have also interacted with a lot of young married men. When we asked them, they told us openly that their mothers demand to be heard, even to be obeyed, especially by the new and young urbane daughter-in-law. The notion behind such behaviour is to take control from the beginning and then, if the daughter-in-law proves herself, to gradually release control as the daughter-in-law learns the ropes of responsibility, submission and leadership.  
However, we think that what the mothers-in-law seem to have failed to register in their experienced minds are that today’s 21st-century young ladies are not just educated, smart, and resourceful, but also daring. They are ready to defy!
Today, thanks to the contribution of the media (especially saas–bahu serials), the knowledge of broken homes, these new brides as they enter into the homes of their husbands, have already built a certain perspective and biased opinions about mothers-in-law. As a result they have also decided how they will handle the situation. At the first sign that their prejudices are proving to be correct (as per the script) these daughters-in-law rebel. They just hate control, being “bossed” around by a “cranky” old mother-in-law, being told what to do and not to do. If these young ladies fail to get the appropriate response from their spouses, they have decided that they would either force the husband to move out of the family home or even divorce. When they marry they do not want to surrender their independence. These young wives are convinced that living alone is the only solution to the, otherwise, a life-long problem. Their motivation is to get as far away as possible from the mother-in-law and to keep her out of their hair.
So it is in this kind of a scenario that families and its members find themselves at loggerheads contributing to the rising level of conflict within the family.
Recently we were speaking to an experienced psychologist on this issue. Giving his assessment for the growth in number of family conflicts in India, he quoted Dr Justice V. S. Malimath, a former chief justice of Karnataka and Kerala. Dr Justice Malimath had told the psychologist, “The problem we face today with our 21st-century women is that they are marrying 18th-century men!”
When I shared this wisdom with a writer friend she responded by saying, “So to survive marriage, either women will have to regress or men will have to progress and catch up with us women.”

No conflict is pleasant. Our concern is to find ways to prevent or to limit it and, if possible, eliminate it altogether. Is there a way to bring about reconciliation and healing in our marital, family and community relationships? We will examine what some of those ways are for a lasting solution to family and parental life.
                                          (Published in  Forward Press, September, 2012 Issue)
Forward Press.

Kabir's Intellectual Movement: Second Stage of OBC Renaissance

                                                           -RAJENDRA PRASAD SINGH
The new intellectual movement led by Kabir, that surfaced in India in the fourteenth century, has been termed as 'Bhakti andolan' (Bhakti movement) by most historians. Ramvilas Sharma, the famous Hindi critic and writer of several books on history calls it 'Lok Jagran' (Public Awakening). He opines that the age of Kabir, Jayasi, Surdas and Tulsidas was the age of public awakening. However, the fact is that Kabir's intellectual movement was neither a 'Bhakti Andolan' nor a 'Lok Jagran'. It was, in fact, the second stage of the 'OBC renaissance'. Buddha was the originator of this renaissance and so, naturally, Buddha had the greatest influence on Kabir.
Kabir: Buddha's next link
The followers of both Buddha and Kabir were the toiling OBC masses, including farmers and artisans. There are fundamental similarities between the principles of Buddha and Kabir. 'Dukkha-Satya' (Noble Truth of Suffering) 'Dukkha-Samudaya' (Noble Truth of the cause of suffering) 'Dukkha Nirodh' (Noble truth of cessation of suffering) and 'Dukkha-Nirodhbhamini pratipad' (Noble Truth of the path leading to cessation of suffering) – are all reflected in Kabir's poetry. 'Madhyma Pratipada' (The Middle Path) is an important pillarstone of Buddhism and Kabir also subscribes to it. He always urged the saints to follow the Middle Path. No only that, several components of the Eight-fold Path can be found in the writings of Kabir. Probably that is why, Kabir never criticised the Buddhist principles. He criticises the 'Shaivites'. He also criticises 'Shaktam-Samarthams' (Worshippers of Shakti and of all Hindu deities respectively). Vaishnavs, Siddha, Charwak, Jains -- he spares none. But nowhere in his poetry does he criticise the Buddhist faith. Some scholars attribute this to the fact that the places of birth and death of Kabir were either close to Buddhist centres of pilgrimage or were surrounded by them.
Differences between the 'Lok Jagran' of Kabir and Tulsi
Dr. Ramvilas Sharma failed to comprehend the differences between Kabir's public awakening and that of Tulsi. The public awakening led by Kabir was very different from the one led by Tulsi. While Tulsi was a believer in the Varna system, Kabir was opposed to it. Kabir was the advocate of 'Sramana' culture. Kabir understood the value of labour while Tulsi believed in making a living by seeking alms. Tulsi never valued labour as much as Kabir did. Kabir had no liking for begging. He believed in earning one's bread by the sweat of one's brow. Unlike Tulsi, Kabir was not desirous of heaven or 'Moksha'.  Kabir only wanted so much that would meet the basic needs of an ordinary farmer or a labourer. He wanted two 'ser' flour, one-half 'ser' pulses, a quarter kilo ghee, salt and a cot to sleep on. Kabir had no faith in the Vedas and in Smriti texts. On the other hand, the Vedas and the Puranas were the source of knowledge for Tulsi. 'Moksha' had different meanings for both of them. Not only that. Tulsi had faith in the Varna system while Kabir rejected it outright. It is obvious that a belief in the Varna system and in religious rituals cannot be described as public awakening or renaissance by any stretch of the imagination. Kabir's writings are imbued with logic, evidence, intellectualism, individualism, scientific temper, labour values, freedom from the stifling control of the religious establishment and a conscious effort at social reform.
Obviously, Kabir's poetry is full of the elements of renaissance or shall we say, OBC renaissance, while Tulsi's poetry is utterly devoid of them. Kabir and Tulsi were poles apart. Still, one doesn't know how and why the historians have clubbed both these poets together and associated them with Bhakti Andolan or Lok Jagran. The truth is that Kabir was the harbinger of an OBC renaissance in medieval India.
Kabir's OBC followers:
Ayodhya Singh Upadhyay 'Harioudh' writes that most of the Kabirpanthis are lower caste Hindus and the number of Upper caste Hindus among them is negligible. Most of the 'Gurus' of this sect are also from the lower castes. The sect has both recluses as well as householders in its ranks but the number of householders is much higher.  Clearly, a majority of the disciples of Kabir were householders of lower castes. The 'Gahpatis' of the Buddhist era were, in a sense, the householders of Kabir's times. Householders included the farmers, labourers and artisans having family and children. Probably, that is why, Romila Thapar says that artisans and farmers played an important role in spreading Kabir's message.  OBC communities like 'Mali' (Gardeners), 'Koeri' (cattle-rearers) , Luhar (Ironsmiths), 'Kumhar' (Potters), 'Kasera' (Coppersmiths,' Badhai' (Carpenters), 'Rangrez' (Dyers), 'Sunar' (Goldsmiths), 'Julaha' (Weavers),  'Gadaria' (graziers) and 'Darzi' (tailors) were followers of Kabir. His favourite disciple was Dharmadas, who was a 'Bania' by caste. He established the Chhattisgarhi branch of Kabirpanthi sect. Amongst the branches of Kabirpanthis, this was the most wide-spread and the biggest in terms of the number of followers. Another branch of Kabirpanthis is in Dhanoti (Bihar). It was established by Bhagwan Das. He was 'Ahir' (milch cattle rearer) and originally hailed from Pishorabad (Bundelkhand). It is said that he accompanied Kabir on all his expeditions. Dharmadas (Bania) and Bhagwandas (Ahir) played a key role in preserving Kabir’s writings.
Kabir, peasants and the bucket-wheel:
It is well-known that Kabir was not a farmer but a craftsman. Despite this, he was well acquainted with the trials and tribulations of the peasants. His writings contain copious references to the life of the peasants, being crushed by medieval Indian feudalism. His poetry describes the cruel exploitation of the farmers by the feudal lords and their miserable lives. He presented the horrible condition of the farmers in contemporary society in an allegorical style. In one of his verses his says, ''I do not want to live in this village. The 'karinde' (agents of the landlord) of this village are very shrewd and cruel. Patwaris spend endlessly on merry-making''. He writes that farmers are subjected to injustice even in the measurement of their land. That is because the landlords use poor-quality 'zarib' (rope for measuring land). The size of the land is dishonestly over-estimated. In another verse, he says that the rope used for admeasuring land is of poor quality. Injustice is being done to the farmers. Additionally, survey officials take 'begar' (forced labour) from the farmers.
Obviously, the poetic beauty of this kind of verses of Kabir--penned in allegorical style-lies in their euphemistic description of the repression of the farmers in the contemporary social context. Different kinds of land find frequent mention in the poetry of Kabir. On one kind of land nothing grows. Kabir describes it as 'usar' (barren). The second kind of land Kabir calls 'dowati'. It is a land where sand is mixed with the soil. The land used as 'khalihans' (place for storage of grains) was different and Kabir calls it 'kharihana'. Villages too were of different kinds. 'kheda' was a small village. 'gola' was the border of the village while 'mawas' was the village of rebel farmers. Many types of agricultural equipment are also described in Kabir's poetry. The wheel had been invented by the Buddhist era but the 'rahat' (bucket wheel) and 'dhankuli' used to draw water from wells were yet to be invented. Probably, Kabir was the first Hindi poet to have used the words 'rahat' and 'dhankuli'. Professor Irfan Habib writes that Babar was the first in India to describe a 'rahat'. During Babar's times, the 'rahat' was used in areas surrounding Lahore, Dipalpur and Sarhind. Obviously, the poetic use of the word 'rahat' by Kabir adds a new fact to the history of medieval India.
Kabir's poetry describes the entire process of paddy cultivation including planting, weeding and upturning of soil. In one of his verses, he has used the word 'bijuka'. It was an upturned pot or any similar thing hung in the fields to ward-off stray animals.
Kabir and other working classes of OBCs:
Kabir had a great affinity with the working classes of OBCs. He mentions such castes in many different ways in his poetry. He turns God into a weaver. He says that the God takes ten months to weave the cloth called the body. In one 'rameni' he writes, God, the weaver, is weaving the cloth of the universe. Sometimes he makes God a potter and sometimes a carpenter. But never, not even by mistake, does he make God a Brahmin or a Kshatriya. To express the fleeting nature of life, he draws parallels with the ironsmith's furnace. In one 'sakhi', he compares the 'Guru' (teacher) with 'Bahelia' (bird-hunter) and says that just like a bird-hunter sets a forest afire,  the teacher ignites the body and mind of the disciple with the fire of wisdom. In another 'sakhi', Kabir compares 'Satguru' with a 'Bania' and 'Sant' with 'Saudagar' (trader). To describe the uniqueness of spiritual love, Kabir uses 'Rasayan'  (chemical) as a symbol. In describing the process of production of chemicals, he has drawn the complete imagery of the preparation of liquor by a 'kalvar' (distiller of spirits). He has compared the God of death with a 'Mali' (gardener) in one of his 'sakhis'.
It is clear that Kabir's poetry is full of the names and technical jargon of the working classes of OBCs. There is a butcher, 'bheesti', vegetable-seller, potter, boatman, 'Ahir', 'Gurjar, pan-seller, ironsmith, 'Behi' (a caste of weavers), goldsmith, 'teli', washerman and many other working classes in Kabir's poetry.
Moreover, Kabir has used the jargon of caste-based occupations in his poetry at several places. If he mentions 'teli' he also mentions 'kolhu' (crusher worked by bullocks). He even mentions the 'seethi' (Oil-cake) left after extracting oil from oilseeds. Kabir also talks of the vessel in which is collected the juice extracted by the bullocks working the 'kolhu'. In Kabir's words it is called 'chatha'. Kabir also refers to the tradition of free distribution of the juice extracted on the first day of the operation of 'kolhu' among the people. He describes this tradition as 'Ratbalian'.
Like 'Telis', the jargon of ironsmiths also finds frequent mention in the poetry of Kabir. Thus there is 'nihai' (anvil) in it and so also 'ghan' (sledge hammer), 'nihali', 'taka', 'chaini' and the 'dhonkni' (blow-pipe)--all used by Ironsmiths. Similarly, many terms and instruments used by weavers also find a place in his writings. These include 'kargahi' (the lower portion of the work-place of weavers), 'kooch' (weavers' brush), 'gaadh' (the hollow in which the weavers spread their feet while working) and 'chamrakh'  (the grass strands used to warp around the beads of the spinning wheel) etc. Kabir also had minute knowledge of the working of carpenters. With the help of an analogy, he describes the entire process of sawing of wood. He has used the names of several instruments, including 'aAra' (saw) and 'kulahara (big axe), used by carpenters in his poetry.
Kabir was a householder. His disciples were also householders. No wonder, his poetry is replete with the names of household articles. For instance, 'anna' (Food grains) 'chun' (flour), 'obri' (small room), 'kathwan' (wooden vessel), 'kadchi' (big spoon), 'katarni' (scissors),  'dora' (thread), 'khatia' (bed), 'gaagri' (earthen pitcher), 'mudar' (old, tattered cloth), 'gondri' (mat made of straw), 'chakki' (stone-grinder), 'dauva' (wooden spoon), 'dandi' (beam of a weighing balance), 'dibuwa' (money), 'thari' (plate), 'bugcha' (bundle), etc. find place in his writings. Not only that, cattle-rearing, which was an inseparable part of the households, also figures in his poetry. For instance, 'khur' (lower part of the feet of four-legged animals), 'khoota' (peg), 'khorhi' (place where the fodder for cattle is kept), 'gau' (cow), 'gadar' (sheep), 'goru' (cattle), 'charwa' (fodder of animals), 'chachihari' (woman seller of butter milk) and 'lehda' (Herd of cattle) are mentioned in his writings.

Thus, we find that the history of many labouring castes is reflected in the poetry of Kabir. But these castes were living at the margins of society mainly due to the 'arna system. Kabir opposed the Varna system and tried to integrate these castes into the mainstream of the society. He blasted the self-glorification of the Brahmins and made fun of the 'Varna' system that was in vogue then and also of the false pride of the upper castes. To sum up, it can be said that Kabir fought against Brahmanism and feudalism and was a great supporter of the OBCs.                                                                                
The new intellectual movement led by Kabir, that surfaced in India in the fourteenth century, has been termed as 'Bhakti andolan' (Bhakti movement) by most historians. Ramvilas Sharma, the famous Hindi critic and writer of several books on history calls it 'Lok Jagran' (Public Awakening). He opines that the age of Kabir, Jayasi, Surdas and Tulsidas was the age of public awakening. However, the fact is that Kabir's intellectual movement was neither a 'Bhakti Andolan' nor a 'Lok Jagran'. It was, in fact, the second stage of the 'OBC renaissance'. Buddha was the originator of this renaissance and so, naturally, Buddha had the greatest influence on Kabir.
Kabir: Buddha's next link
The followers of both Buddha and Kabir were the toiling OBC masses, including farmers and artisans. There are fundamental similarities between the principles of Buddha and Kabir. 'Dukkha-Satya' (Noble Truth of Suffering) 'Dukkha-Samudaya' (Noble Truth of the cause of suffering) 'Dukkha Nirodh' (Noble truth of cessation of suffering) and 'Dukkha-Nirodhbhamini pratipad' (Noble Truth of the path leading to cessation of suffering) – are all reflected in Kabir's poetry. 'Madhyma Pratipada' (The Middle Path) is an important pillarstone of Buddhism and Kabir also subscribes to it. He always urged the saints to follow the Middle Path. No only that, several components of the Eight-fold Path can be found in the writings of Kabir. Probably that is why, Kabir never criticised the Buddhist principles. He criticises the 'Shaivites'. He also criticises 'Shaktam-Samarthams' (Worshippers of Shakti and of all Hindu deities respectively). Vaishnavs, Siddha, Charwak, Jains -- he spares none. But nowhere in his poetry does he criticise the Buddhist faith. Some scholars attribute this to the fact that the places of birth and death of Kabir were either close to Buddhist centres of pilgrimage or were surrounded by them.
Differences between the 'Lok Jagran' of Kabir and Tulsi
Dr. Ramvilas Sharma failed to comprehend the differences between Kabir's public awakening and that of Tulsi. The public awakening led by Kabir was very different from the one led by Tulsi. While Tulsi was a believer in the Varna system, Kabir was opposed to it. Kabir was the advocate of 'Sramana' culture. Kabir understood the value of labour while Tulsi believed in making a living by seeking alms. Tulsi never valued labour as much as Kabir did. Kabir had no liking for begging. He believed in earning one's bread by the sweat of one's brow. Unlike Tulsi, Kabir was not desirous of heaven or 'Moksha'.  Kabir only wanted so much that would meet the basic needs of an ordinary farmer or a labourer. He wanted two 'ser' flour, one-half 'ser' pulses, a quarter kilo ghee, salt and a cot to sleep on. Kabir had no faith in the Vedas and in Smriti texts. On the other hand, the Vedas and the Puranas were the source of knowledge for Tulsi. 'Moksha' had different meanings for both of them. Not only that. Tulsi had faith in the Varna system while Kabir rejected it outright. It is obvious that a belief in the Varna system and in religious rituals cannot be described as public awakening or renaissance by any stretch of the imagination. Kabir's writings are imbued with logic, evidence, intellectualism, individualism, scientific temper, labour values, freedom from the stifling control of the religious establishment and a conscious effort at social reform.
Obviously, Kabir's poetry is full of the elements of renaissance or shall we say, OBC renaissance, while Tulsi's poetry is utterly devoid of them. Kabir and Tulsi were poles apart. Still, one doesn't know how and why the historians have clubbed both these poets together and associated them with Bhakti Andolan or Lok Jagran. The truth is that Kabir was the harbinger of an OBC renaissance in medieval India.
Kabir's OBC followers:
Ayodhya Singh Upadhyay 'Harioudh' writes that most of the Kabirpanthis are lower caste Hindus and the number of Upper caste Hindus among them is negligible. Most of the 'Gurus' of this sect are also from the lower castes. The sect has both recluses as well as householders in its ranks but the number of householders is much higher.  Clearly, a majority of the disciples of Kabir were householders of lower castes. The 'Gahpatis' of the Buddhist era were, in a sense, the householders of Kabir's times. Householders included the farmers, labourers and artisans having family and children. Probably, that is why, Romila Thapar says that artisans and farmers played an important role in spreading Kabir's message.  OBC communities like 'Mali' (Gardeners), 'Koeri' (cattle-rearers) , Luhar (Ironsmiths), 'Kumhar' (Potters), 'Kasera' (Coppersmiths,' Badhai' (Carpenters), 'Rangrez' (Dyers), 'Sunar' (Goldsmiths), 'Julaha' (Weavers),  'Gadaria' (graziers) and 'Darzi' (tailors) were followers of Kabir. His favourite disciple was Dharmadas, who was a 'Bania' by caste. He established the Chhattisgarhi branch of Kabirpanthi sect. Amongst the branches of Kabirpanthis, this was the most wide-spread and the biggest in terms of the number of followers. Another branch of Kabirpanthis is in Dhanoti (Bihar). It was established by Bhagwan Das. He was 'Ahir' (milch cattle rearer) and originally hailed from Pishorabad (Bundelkhand). It is said that he accompanied Kabir on all his expeditions. Dharmadas (Bania) and Bhagwandas (Ahir) played a key role in preserving Kabir’s writings.
Kabir, peasants and the bucket-wheel:
It is well-known that Kabir was not a farmer but a craftsman. Despite this, he was well acquainted with the trials and tribulations of the peasants. His writings contain copious references to the life of the peasants, being crushed by medieval Indian feudalism. His poetry describes the cruel exploitation of the farmers by the feudal lords and their miserable lives. He presented the horrible condition of the farmers in contemporary society in an allegorical style. In one of his verses his says, ''I do not want to live in this village. The 'karinde' (agents of the landlord) of this village are very shrewd and cruel. Patwaris spend endlessly on merry-making''. He writes that farmers are subjected to injustice even in the measurement of their land. That is because the landlords use poor-quality 'zarib' (rope for measuring land). The size of the land is dishonestly over-estimated. In another verse, he says that the rope used for admeasuring land is of poor quality. Injustice is being done to the farmers. Additionally, survey officials take 'begar' (forced labour) from the farmers.
Obviously, the poetic beauty of this kind of verses of Kabir--penned in allegorical style-lies in their euphemistic description of the repression of the farmers in the contemporary social context. Different kinds of land find frequent mention in the poetry of Kabir. On one kind of land nothing grows. Kabir describes it as 'usar' (barren). The second kind of land Kabir calls 'dowati'. It is a land where sand is mixed with the soil. The land used as 'khalihans' (place for storage of grains) was different and Kabir calls it 'kharihana'. Villages too were of different kinds. 'kheda' was a small village. 'gola' was the border of the village while 'mawas' was the village of rebel farmers. Many types of agricultural equipment are also described in Kabir's poetry. The wheel had been invented by the Buddhist era but the 'rahat' (bucket wheel) and 'dhankuli' used to draw water from wells were yet to be invented. Probably, Kabir was the first Hindi poet to have used the words 'rahat' and 'dhankuli'. Professor Irfan Habib writes that Babar was the first in India to describe a 'rahat'. During Babar's times, the 'rahat' was used in areas surrounding Lahore, Dipalpur and Sarhind. Obviously, the poetic use of the word 'rahat' by Kabir adds a new fact to the history of medieval India.
Kabir's poetry describes the entire process of paddy cultivation including planting, weeding and upturning of soil. In one of his verses, he has used the word 'bijuka'. It was an upturned pot or any similar thing hung in the fields to ward-off stray animals.
Kabir and other working classes of OBCs:
Kabir had a great affinity with the working classes of OBCs. He mentions such castes in many different ways in his poetry. He turns God into a weaver. He says that the God takes ten months to weave the cloth called the body. In one 'rameni' he writes, God, the weaver, is weaving the cloth of the universe. Sometimes he makes God a potter and sometimes a carpenter. But never, not even by mistake, does he make God a Brahmin or a Kshatriya. To express the fleeting nature of life, he draws parallels with the ironsmith's furnace. In one 'sakhi', he compares the 'Guru' (teacher) with 'Bahelia' (bird-hunter) and says that just like a bird-hunter sets a forest afire,  the teacher ignites the body and mind of the disciple with the fire of wisdom. In another 'sakhi', Kabir compares 'Satguru' with a 'Bania' and 'Sant' with 'Saudagar' (trader). To describe the uniqueness of spiritual love, Kabir uses 'Rasayan'  (chemical) as a symbol. In describing the process of production of chemicals, he has drawn the complete imagery of the preparation of liquor by a 'kalvar' (distiller of spirits). He has compared the God of death with a 'Mali' (gardener) in one of his 'sakhis'.
It is clear that Kabir's poetry is full of the names and technical jargon of the working classes of OBCs. There is a butcher, 'bheesti', vegetable-seller, potter, boatman, 'Ahir', 'Gurjar, pan-seller, ironsmith, 'Behi' (a caste of weavers), goldsmith, 'teli', washerman and many other working classes in Kabir's poetry.
Moreover, Kabir has used the jargon of caste-based occupations in his poetry at several places. If he mentions 'teli' he also mentions 'kolhu' (crusher worked by bullocks). He even mentions the 'seethi' (Oil-cake) left after extracting oil from oilseeds. Kabir also talks of the vessel in which is collected the juice extracted by the bullocks working the 'kolhu'. In Kabir's words it is called 'chatha'. Kabir also refers to the tradition of free distribution of the juice extracted on the first day of the operation of 'kolhu' among the people. He describes this tradition as 'Ratbalian'.
Like 'Telis', the jargon of ironsmiths also finds frequent mention in the poetry of Kabir. Thus there is 'nihai' (anvil) in it and so also 'ghan' (sledge hammer), 'nihali', 'taka', 'chaini' and the 'dhonkni' (blow-pipe)--all used by Ironsmiths. Similarly, many terms and instruments used by weavers also find a place in his writings. These include 'kargahi' (the lower portion of the work-place of weavers), 'kooch' (weavers' brush), 'gaadh' (the hollow in which the weavers spread their feet while working) and 'chamrakh'  (the grass strands used to warp around the beads of the spinning wheel) etc. Kabir also had minute knowledge of the working of carpenters. With the help of an analogy, he describes the entire process of sawing of wood. He has used the names of several instruments, including 'aAra' (saw) and 'kulahara (big axe), used by carpenters in his poetry.
Kabir was a householder. His disciples were also householders. No wonder, his poetry is replete with the names of household articles. For instance, 'anna' (Food grains) 'chun' (flour), 'obri' (small room), 'kathwan' (wooden vessel), 'kadchi' (big spoon), 'katarni' (scissors),  'dora' (thread), 'khatia' (bed), 'gaagri' (earthen pitcher), 'mudar' (old, tattered cloth), 'gondri' (mat made of straw), 'chakki' (stone-grinder), 'dauva' (wooden spoon), 'dandi' (beam of a weighing balance), 'dibuwa' (money), 'thari' (plate), 'bugcha' (bundle), etc. find place in his writings. Not only that, cattle-rearing, which was an inseparable part of the households, also figures in his poetry. For instance, 'khur' (lower part of the feet of four-legged animals), 'khoota' (peg), 'khorhi' (place where the fodder for cattle is kept), 'gau' (cow), 'gadar' (sheep), 'goru' (cattle), 'charwa' (fodder of animals), 'chachihari' (woman seller of butter milk) and 'lehda' (Herd of cattle) are mentioned in his writings.

Thus, we find that the history of many labouring castes is reflected in the poetry of Kabir. But these castes were living at the margins of society mainly due to the 'arna system. Kabir opposed the Varna system and tried to integrate these castes into the mainstream of the society. He blasted the self-glorification of the Brahmins and made fun of the 'Varna' system that was in vogue then and also of the false pride of the upper castes. To sum up, it can be said that Kabir fought against Brahmanism and feudalism and was a great supporter of the OBCs.  
                                                   (Published in  Forward Press, September, 2012 Issue)
Forward Press.

Wednesday, 21 August 2013

नरेन्द्र मोदी और नीतीश कुमार : दो मित्रों की कहानी

- प्रेमकुमार मणि
मित्र से बने शत्रु
नरेन्द्र मोदी और नीतीश कुमार क्रमशः गुजरात और बिहार के मुख्यमंत्री हैं और इन दिनों लगातार सुर्खियों में हैं। दोनों न केवल एक ही राशि के हैं, बल्कि एक राजनीतिक गठबंधन, एन डी ए, के भी; लेकिन दोनों में आजकल ठनी है। कम-से-कम दिखता तो ऐसा ही है।
लेकिन कम ही लोग जानते हैं कि नीतीश कुमार का अन्तरमन नरेन्द्र मोदी से गहरे प्रभावित रहा है। आज दिख रही शत्रुता में भी कभी-कभी मुझे मित्रता का ही भाव दिखता है। मनोविज्ञान में प्यार घृणा एक ही सिक्के के दो पहलू माने जाते हैं। अमरीकी कवयित्री एडना सेंट विन्सेंट मिले की पंक्तियाँ ‘ओह माई फ़ोस, एन्ड ओ माई फ़्रेन्ड्स’ किंचित याद आती है। इन दोनों की मित्रता और शत्रुता कुछ ज्यादा ही गड्ड-मड्ड हो गयी है।
एक घटना को याद कर रहा हूं। 2004 की गरमियां थीं। लोकसभा के चुनावों का नतीजा आ चुका था और बिहार में लालू प्रसाद के नेतृत्व में यूपीए को निर्णायक बढत मिली थी। जार्ज-नीतीश के नेतृत्व में एनडीए बुरी तरह पिट चुका था। नीतीश जी मेरे घर आये थे। फ़ुरसत में थे, सो घंटों दुनिया जहान की बातें होती रहीं। मेरा कहना था कि नरेन्द्र मोदी के कारण एनडीए को हार का सामना करना पड़ा। नीतीश जी इसे मानने के लिए तैयार नहीं थे। मैं नरेन्द्र मोदी के खिलाफ़ रुख लिये हुए था। नीतीश जी ने स्थिर और गंभीर होकर कहा – नरेन्द्र मोदी बीजेपी का नया चेहरा है। वह अति पिछड़े तबके से आता है। घांची है, घांची। गुजरात की एक अत्यल्पसंख्यक पिछड़ी जाति है यह। बीजेपी की ब्राह्म्ण लाबी उसे बदनाम करने पर तुली है। इसमें वाजपेयी तक शामिल हैं। डायनमिक आदमी है। आप अगर उससे एक बार मिल लीजिएगा तो उसका प्रशंसक हो जाइएगा। निहायत गरीब परिवार से आता है। सादगी और कर्मठता कूट-कूट कर भरी है उसमें। नीतीश जी एक त्वरा (ट्रांस) में थे। वह बोले ही जा रहे थे। मोदी द्वारा दिये गये एक आतिथ्य को चुभलाते हुए  उन्होंने अपनी बात को एक विराम दिया – ‘मैं तो उसका फ़ैन हो गया हूं।‘
मुझे आश्चर्य होता है नरेन्द्र मोदी का यह फ़ैन आज उसके लिए फ़न काढकर कैसे बैठा है। क्या इसे ही राजनीति कहते हैं। क्या मुस्लिम वोट बैंक पर सेंध लगाने के लिए यह सब हो रहा है। या फ़िर कुछ और बात है।
मैं नहीं बता सकता कि असलियत क्या है। क्योंकि नीतीश कुमार से इस वक्त मेरी व्यक्तिगत दूरी है। अनुमान आखिर अनुमान होते हैं। कहनेवाले तो यह भी कहते हैं कि प्रकारांतर से नीतीश कुमार नरेन्द्र मोदी की मदद ही कर रहे हैं, वे उन्हें लगातार चर्चा में बनाये रखे हुए हैं। ऐसा मित्र लाभ भला कौन नहीं पाना चाहेगा। संभव है इस बात में कुछ सच्चाई हो, लेकिन सार्वजनिक संबंधों की जो कड़वाहट नीतीश कुमार ने पैदा की है, वह तो दिख रही है। इस कड़वाहट से शायद उन्हें किसी बड़े नतीजे की उम्मीद है। लेकिन क्या यह संभव है?
नरेन्द्र मोदी बीजेपी की ओर से प्रधानमंत्री पद के संभावित उम्मीदवार हैं। नीतीश कुमार के मन में भी इसी पद की व्याकुल लालसा है। स्वार्थ के इस टकराव ने ही मित्र को शत्रु बना दिया है। ऐसे में कोई क्या कर सकता है?
पिछले बिहार विधानसभा चुनाव के ठीक पहले जहां तक मुझे याद है जून 2010 में नीतीश कुमार ने पटना में आयोजित बीजेपी राष्ट्रीय कार्यसमिति की बैठक में शामिल होने वाले लोगों के लिए अपने सरकारी आवास पर एक भोज का आयोजन किया था। ऐन वक्त पर एक विज्ञापन का बहाना बनाकर उस भोज को रद्द कर दिया गया। विज्ञापनकर्ता कोई व्यापारी था और उसने 2009 में लोकसभा चुनाव के दौरान जालंधर में एक ही मंच से चुनावी उद्घोष कर रहे नरेन्द्र मोदी और नीतीश कुमार की जगमग तस्वीर अखबारों में प्रकाशित करा दिया था। दरअसल वह बिहार की धरती पर इस तस्वीर के साथ नरेन्द्र मोदी का इस्तकबाल करना चाहता था। बदहवास नीतीश ने सामान्य शिष्टाचार को भी ताक पर रख दिया। बाढ के समय गुजरात सरकार द्वारा भेजी गयी सहायता राशि लौटा दी। नीतीश, नरेन्द्र मोदी से अपने संबंधों के सार्वजनिक करने के विरुद्ध थे। विज्ञापनकर्ता ने शायद इस बात को गंभीरता से नहीं समझा था कि कुछ सम्बन्ध - खासकर प्रेम सम्बन्ध – के सार्वजनिक करने खतरे ज्यादा होते हैं। यही हुआ। भाजपा नेताओं को अपमानित होना पड़ा। उन्होंने सब कुछ बर्दाश्त किया। हालांकि उन्हें इन सब का अभ्यास है। उत्तर प्रदेश की राजनीति में मायावती के नखरे भी उन्होंने खूब बर्दाश्त किये हैं। यह गठबंधन की राजनीति की विवशता है। भाजपा अपनी दुधारु गाय के लताड़ भी बर्दाश्त करेगी। असलियत तो यही है न कि भाजपा के राजनीतिक खूंटे पर नीतीश हैं। न कि नीतीश के खूंटे पर भाजपा।
2012 के राष्ट्रपति चुनाव में नीतीश ने भाजपा के उम्मीदवार का समर्थन न करके कांग्रेसी उम्मीदवार प्रणव मुखर्जी का समर्थन किया, तब एक बार फ़िर मीडिया ने नीतीश की धर्मनिरपेक्षता को थपथपाया। मीडिया ने इस बात की भी समीक्षा नहीं की कि इस मामले में धर्मनिरपेक्षता की बात कहां आती है। क्या भाजपा समर्थित उम्मीदवार संगमा सांप्रदायिक चरित्र के हैं? और नहीं तो फ़िर क्या कांग्रेस ही धर्मनिरपेक्षता का असली घराना है। नीतीश इस बीच ऐसा अलाप लगाया मानों वह ही धर्मनिरपेक्षता के मुख्य ध्वजवाहक हैं और इस मुल्क की सेक्यूलर पालिटिक्स बस उन्हीं के बूते चल रही है। किसी ने भी वास्तविकता को सामने लाने का साहस नहीं किया कि प्रणव मुखर्जी कांग्रेस से अधिक अंबानी घराने के उम्मीदवार थे, और नीतीश को इस घराने के विरुद्ध जाने की हिम्मत नहीं थी; क्योंकि इस घराने का एक दूत नीतीश के दल में सांसद के रुप में बना हुआ है, और पू रे दल को संचालित करता है। नीतीश की पीठ थपथपा रहे लोगों को भी याद रखना चाहिए कि प्रणव के समर्थन में नीतीश थे, तो बगल में बाल ठाकरे भी थे।
मैं उनलोगों में नहीं हूं, जो नरेंद्र मोदी को गोधरा उपरान्त दंगों के लिए क्लीन चिट दे चुके हैं, या फ़िर बाबरी मस्जिद मामले के लिए आडवाणी के कृत्यों को भूल चुके हैं। 2002 का गुजरात दंगा भयावह था और मुख्यमंत्री के रुप में नरेन्द्र मोदी की जिम्मेवारी थी कि वह उसे रोकें। मैं उन्हें आज भी दोषी मानता हूं। लेकिन क्या वह अकेले दोषी थे? उस वक्त केन्द्र में अटल बिहारी वाजपेयी प्रधानमंत्री थे। उन्होंने गुजरात सरकार को बर्खास्त क्यों नहीं किया? उनके पास तो बाबरी मस्जिद ध्वंस के बाद कई राज्य सरकारों को एक साथ बर्खास्त किये जाने का उदाहरण मौजूद था। वाजपेयी ने गुजरात दंगों के पूर्व बिहार में सेनारी नरसंहार पर बिहार सरकार को बर्खास्त कर राष्ट्रपति शासन लगाया था। सेनारी दुर्घटना से गुजरात दंगे कहीं ज्यादा भयावह थे। जब एक नरसंहार के लिए बिहार सरकार बर्खास्त हो सकती थी, तो फ़िर गुजरात सरकार क्यों नहीं? क्या नरेन्द्र मोदी ने अकेले राजधर्म का पालन नहीं किया था? वाजपेयी कौन से राजधर्म का पालन कर रहे थे।
और वाजपेयी को मसीहा मानने वाले नीतीश कुमार ने तब किस राजधर्म का पालन किया था? नरेन्द्र मोदी की आज वे चाहे जितनी तौहीन कर लें, उन्हें यह नहीं भूलना चाहिए कि उस वक्त रेलमंत्री वही थे और गोधरा कांड रेल में ही हुआ था। उसके पूर्व गाइसल ट्रेन दुर्घटना में नैतिक जिम्मेदारी लेते हुए रेल मंत्री पद से त्यागपत्र देने वाले (हालांकि त्यागत्रित सरकार से) नीतीश गोधरा हादसे का निरीक्षण के लिए भी प्रस्तुत नहीं हुए। आश्चर्य है कि यह आदमी भी आज नरेन्द्र मोदी को नसीहत दे रहा है और वह भी दंगों को लेकर।
नरेन्द्र मोदी और नीतीश कुमार दोनों गोधरा मामले में दूध धुले नहीं हैं। दोनों ने, और फ़िर दोनों के दादागुरु वाजपेयी ने भी तब राजधर्म का पालन नहीं किया था। दोनों विज्ञापन प्रिय हैं, और दोनों ने विकास पुरुष की पट्टी अपने माथे पर खुद बांध रखी है। उपलब्धियों की बात की जाय तो गुजरात और बिहार दोनों राज्यों में बेहतरह असमानता बढी है। दोनों जगह के अमीर ज्यादा पावरफ़ुल हुए हैं, और गरीब ज्यादा दयनीय।

लेकिन नरेन्द्र मोदी और नीतीश कुमार में कुछ गैरमामूली अंतर भी है। नीतीश बिहार के कुलक उच्चकुर्मी परिवार से आते हैं और नरेन्द्र मोदी गुजरात के निर्धन अति पिछड़े घांची परिवार से। नीतीश के पिता आयुर्वेदिक वैद्यराज और कांग्रेसी नेता थे जबकि नरेन्द्र के पिता मामूली चाय दुकानदार- जहां नरेन्द्र ने अपना बचपन ग्राहकों के जूठे गिलास मांजकर गुजारा। नीतीश इंजीनियरिंग की पढाई कर रहे थे, तब नरेन्द्र एक वकील परिवार के घर में डोमेस्टिक हेल्पर थे – जहां रोज नौ कमरों की सफ़ाई और पन्द्रह लोगों के खाना बनाने का काम उन्हें करना पड़ता था। उन्होंने प्राइवेट परीक्षायें देकर येन केन प्रकारेण डिग्रियां हासिल की हैं और जो सीखा है दुनिया की खुली युनिवर्सिटी में सीखा है। वह दक्षिणपंथी राजनीति से जुड़े हैं, लेकिन उनका बचपन और युवावस्था रुसी लेखक मैक्सिम गोर्की की तरह संघर्षमय रहा है। एक अंतर और रहा है नरेन्द्र मोदी और नीतीश में। मुख्यमंत्री के रुप में भी नरेन्द्र सादगी पसंद रहे हैं। उन्होंने चापलूसों-चाटुकारों को अपने से दूर ही रखा है। दागदार लोगों से जुड़ना नरेन्द्र मोदी पसंद नहीं आया। लेकिन यही बात नीतीश कुमार के लिए नहीं कही जा सकती। कभी साफ़-सुथरी छवि वाले नीतीश आज विवादों से घिरे हैं। उनकी जीवन शैली बदल चुकी है। आरटीआई से प्राप्त जानकारी के मुताबिक अपने सरकारी आवास और पैतृक गांव को संवारने में उन्होंने सरकारी खजाने से सैंकड़ों करोड़ रुपए खर्च किये हैं। चापलूस, अपराधी और दागदार आज उनकी खास पसंद हैं और अपने खानदान की मूर्तियां स्थापित करने में मायावती से वह थोड़ा ही पीछे हैं।

                                                       (Published in  Forward Press, September, 2012 Issue)
Forward Press.