S.L. Bhyrappa‘s latest novel Aavarana has thrown a sharp barb into the incestuous cesspool that is Kannada literature.
In one corner is U.R. Anantha Murthy, the Jnanpith Award-winning former chairman of the Sahitya Akademi. Murthy’s supporters, a band of people who freely slap themselves the label “progressive” to describe their every act and action, claim Aavarana dangerously advances the fundamentalist agenda by tilting at the windmills of history, and that it seeks to divide society on communal lines.
“Bhyrappa does not know either Hindu religion or the art of story-telling. He is only a debater,” says Anantha Murthy. “He does not go beyond his opinions. He constructs the plot and selects characters only to suit his opinions and end up as a debater, rather than a creative writer.”
“It’s a bad book,” says Chandrashekhar Kambar.
“Reject the book” says G.K. Govinda Rao.
In the other corner, is Bhyrappa and his supporters, the so-called knicker lobby, who take a vicarious delight in the characterisation of the book which leaves nothing to the imagination. They cite the freedom of speech and expression for Bhyrappa to write what he wants. They say the book’s popularity is testimony to Bhyrappa’s ability to feel the pulse of the reader. And they accuse the book’s critics of not answering the basic questions that he raises.
“How is it possible to agree with Anantha Murthy that Bhyrappa does not know how to write novels? Does it mean Bhyrappa is a muff (dadda) and lakhs of his admiring readers too are muffs,” asks Mathoor Krishnamurthy, the Sanskrit scholar and director of Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, Bangalore.
Of course, this isn’t the first time that Bhyrappa has clashed with the so-called secular brigade. When Girish Karnad stood up to defend Tipu Sultan, when the latter was branded anti-Kannada by education minister D.H. Shankara Murthy, Bhyrappa responded in kind.
But in l’affaire Aavarana, it is Anantha Murthy’s easy labelling of Bhyrappa as a debator who doesn’t know how to write a novel that has the ordinary reader all irritated. Below are some of the letters to the editor of Deccan Herald, that show how Anantha Murthy has painted himself into a corner.
This refers to Anantha Murthy’s comments on novelist Bhyrappa. It is unfortunate that the common man cannot understand URA’s works. It is high time URA withdraws from public life and spends time with his grandchildren at home. It is rightly said that childhood recurs during old age. Go play with your toys.
Amritha S.G., Bangalore
**
One wonders whether URA is reviewing the book Aavarana or its writer Bhyrappa, the person. He would have done well to question any of the issues taken up by Bhyrappa in his book. If the author is a debater. Readers like his debates.
Anasuya Aswath, Bangalore
**
Anantha Murthy’s personal attack on Bhyarappa is totally unbecoming of a litterateur. When many book lovers enjoy reading Bhyrappa’s novels, it hardly matters what a political opportunistic like URA says. He could just write a critical review of Aavarana and let the readers decide whether the book is worth reading or not. After Samskara, has URA written anything worthwhile?
If anyone wishes to know what is bad writing one should read his Bhava. URA must introspect to know who is a political opportunist. He left Janata Parivar, and is now batting for the Communists as they had supported him in his unsuccessful bid to enter Rajya Sabha. But this is not to undermine his intellect and all that he has accomplished for his own glory.
Shanthu Shantharam, Ellicott City, MD, USA
**
How could a university professor make such a statement on Bhyrappa, who has written novels like Parva, Tantu and Mandra. This proves that URA is jealous of Bhyrappa. URA might have also noticed that his character is portrayed as a Sastry in Avarana. Hence he hates Avarana and Bhyrappa.
J Vasudevamurthy, San Jose, CA, USA
**
I am yet to read the novel Aavarana, but Anantha Murthy’s comments were unwanted. Even after winning the Jnanapith award URA is not as popular as Bhyrappa. I’ve read most of the novels of Bhyrappa, which are wonderful pieces of writing. There could be a few novels of him which are of bad taste, and that cannot reduce his credentials as a good story-teller. Also, Bhyrappa does not boast of his achievements. Whereas, URA, who pressed for the use of “Bengaluru” for Bangalore in English too, made it a big issue as if it was his discovery. It’s better for URA to make a reality check in the market on the popularity of Bhyrappa’s works, which sell like hot-cakes.
Raghavendra Udupa, Bangalore
**
This refers to Bhyrappa a debater, not a story-teller, says URA. This is nothing but professional jealousy. Bhyrappa’s Aavarana has reached record sales and this has upset Anantha Murthy. Apart from that, he takes pleasure in criticising anything related to Hinduism.
A Srikantaiah, Bangalore
**
As naturally as night follows day, Anantha Murthy has said he was quoted out of context by the media and has vowed never to speak at a literary meet where reporters are present. But a literary spat that splits writers, readers and the media diametrically is on.
The key questions of the debate are:
# What is a novel, and what is its function? Does a novelist have a social responsibility?
# Is there just one way of writing a novel? And if it doesn’t conform, is it necessarily a bad novel?
# Is having an “agenda” or having a point to convey a bad thing while writing a novel?
# Is a novelist wrong to write a novel that pleases his core constituents?
# Is popular appeal necessarily proof of the book’s greatness or gravitas?
May the better writer—or better debator—win.
Read the full text of Anantha Murthy’s speech
>Dr. Ananthamurthy, Chandrashekara Kamabara, G. K. Govinda Rao!
What’s common to these people?
0. All are socialists(they claim to be one, whether they really are, is debatable!).
1. All three are known to have kept their real profession in background and spending the time that for which they were accountable to students and us(tax payers not the govt.), for their activisms.
Activism for name and fame! All whilst deriding the establishment while being dependant on it for their livelihood(yes, it is their right to criticise, but there is no right without the duty!).
Show me one person/book/article stating that Prof. SL Bhyrappa neglected his duty. Whatever his activism may be, has been reflected through his writings.
2. These are the kind of people, who think that any social issue how so ever complex it may be, can be solved if they go and beat their chests and the other party have to succumb to their diktats, if not they will be retaliated through op-eds disguised as news columns and glorified in the cover pages of BOF media.
I remember reading an aricle (most probably in Star of Mysore/Andolana/Maisooru Mitra) which sought opinions of various citizens of Mysore about candidates of Member of Parliament from Mysore, that was a time when BJP was advantaged due to Babri Masjid demolition and probably Srikantadatta Wodeyar was in BJP; Prof. Bhyrappa said that he earnestly wants an independent candidate, who also had been vocal against the BJP and its way of functioning, to win(perhaps Dr. Bhamy Shenoy?).
If we were to go by the description of Prof. Bhyrappa by these “communist” ‘literary’ activists then, wouldn’t he have touted for the BJP candidate?
LikeLike
The text on rujuvathu.sampada.net is his take on critiques and further mud-slinging NOT the actual text of the speech.
LikeLike
ELLA OK SHASTRIGALIGE SITTU YAAKE?
URA should own or disown the character of Shastri in the novel…
Kumbala Kai Kalla…andre…
LikeLike
UR A ‘s opinion is partially right. by bhyrappa’s own standard AAVARANA is a huge disappointment. man who gave the world classics like TANTU,DAATU,DOORA SARIDARU,SAARTHA uses his novel to propogate RSS MINDSET. but claiming bhyrappa is not a good writer is not acceptable.he still remains a literary genius.
LikeLike
Incestuous cesspool? Wow.
LikeLike
GK3S
You have been reading the text very carefully! Yeah “incestuous cesspool” indeed:) Amazing phrase isn’t it?
LikeLike
Little was known about Aavarana’s communally volatile content when Bhyrappa was felicitated by no less a person than Pravinbhai Tagodia during the Hindu Samajothsava at our very own Mysore.
Probably, Tagodia knew in advance what was coming in Aavarana. Hence, the huge garland he almost drowned Bhyrappa in at the Samajothsava. Bhyrappa could have dedicated the novel to Tagodia and his ilk.
LikeLike
From the way UR has reacted about the media, I think the remarks of UR have been misquoted or taken out of context. Probably while making a critical analysis of Bhyrappa’s novel, UR intended a free and frank discussion on the current trends in Kannada novels. I think there is a missing link somewhere, which has resulted in this controversy.
LikeLike
The positive thing is that so many Kannadigas are tuned into literature that this issue has become front page news. The bad news is that the writers involved seem to be taking overtly political stands. Or is it bad news?
LikeLike
DB, it is quite a colourful phrase, though I don’t really know what it means :)
LikeLike
Aham Brahmaasi, that is what perhaps URA things now..he is getting more and more enlightened as he ages..as for the whole hearted expert comments of his fellow ultra ‘Secular’ supporters – GK Govinda rao, Baragur just trash them
LikeLike
I agree with G3S. The silver lining is that a literary work is creating debate, though this could have been above the personal level. All said, SLB did not deserve such comments on his calibre if those are true.
LikeLike
What would help is if URA stops shooting from the hip. Novels reflect the state of a society or a section of a society at a particular time line, and any fibrillating response does much disservice to informed discussion.
LikeLike
Truth always hurts
LikeLike
Gokulam 3rd stage,
I have been reading your learned comments on these pages, and kept guessing who you might be. I followed the links in your blog found that Thejo – Thejovardhana, is your brother. You must be Yashu – Yashovardhana – both of you studied in St.Joseph’s, Mysore. Grandsons of Late Samethanahalli Ramarao. Am I right?
I am very happy to read your postings on your and Thejo’s blogs.
LikeLike
Ananda, Gokulam 3rd Stage is specific enough ;) And I am very flattered you like my rantings. You form an exclusive club of one!
I am guessing you know my brother. From school?
LikeLike
Gokulam 3rd Stage,
Your ‘Avarana’ has been ‘Anaavarana’ed. So, you better use your true name, which is very nice.
Yes, I know a littlle about your family. Particularly, I am an admirer of your grandfather’s works.
And I choose to remain anonymous. How cruel of me!!
LikeLike
haha, G3S, now someone other than me knows your identity! — but he earned the knowledge. :)
LikeLike
ella okay. “presumptuous cesspool” yake?
LikeLike
The character of ‘Shastri’ in ‘Avarana’ is a perfect portrayal of pseudo-intellectuals and hypocrites, the likes of URA, GK and their cronies.
The credibility of ‘Jnanapeeth’ is questionable since it was awarded to these two. What have they achieved in kannada literature? One or two sensational or popular books? How have these contributed to the society? What is their depth of knowledge in any subject? Bhyrappa, on the other hand is a great scholar, the sheer variety of his creations speak of the magnitude of his knowledge.
The science of criticism becomes a load of garbage if the critics do not respond to the acceptance of the works by majority of the readers. Their battle cries are simply similar to those of the ‘eunuchs in the sultan’s harem’ as narrated in ‘Avarana’.
I think URA is suffering from a sense of guilt for having engineered the award of Jnanapeeth for himself and GK, particularly when his conscious is whispering that he does not deserve it and much more does Bhyrappa.
Pain, suffering and anguish are not forgotten easily, and never forgiven. As very correctly suggested by Bhyrappa, the muslims of this country must express their regret for how their forefathers treated the natives. Owning responsibilities for all the atrocities committed is a virtue in itself and will be embraced with both arms. It can not simply be forgotten, because the memory lives on for ever – in books, in tales, in memoirs, and it could worsen the feelings of hatred when they become twisted legends, genarations after genarations.
URA must understand this
LikeLike
Nikhil,
You had it easy my friend! But who knows if Ananda is a ‘he’?
Ananda,
Your anonymity is your janma siddha hakku :) Have fun! Oh, and I prefer to be associated with the fine neighbourhood that I grew up in.
Can anyone tell me the definition of a “pseudo-intellectual” and why even being an “intellectual” is a pejorative term?
Asking for apologies for past sins committed by any community is a slippery slope. Has any Shankaracharya apologized for the massacre of Buddhists in the wake of the Adi Shankara’s revival of Hinduism in our country? Moreover, Hindus who are an overwhelming majority in this country asking for an apology from the Muslims is a bit comical whether that apology is deserved or not. To the extent that history is used to inform ourselves and not repeat mistakes, issues such as the ones raised in Aavarana should be explored. However, history used as a tool for getting back at someone will only result in mudslinging (with enough mud to go around) and serves no productive purpose.
LikeLike
G3S..
well put in the last para.
personally, elitism associated with intellectualism is very off putting. very often knowledge is mistaken for insight. bari knowledge itkonD insight irourthara meri thaaralla avaru pseudo-intellectuals. maThaadipatis of various religions goo akkamangoo, shareefangu iro difference.
btw.. yaara kaala?
mutthamma, chondamma …
LikeLike
ts, tumba thanks for that explanation. As AtmasAkshi mentioned elsewhere, labeling people most of the times results in us ignoring what that person is saying. In an ideal world, we should be discussing issues and not the “issuers” alva? The sad thing is nothing URA every says is discussed without some nasty comments made about the man himself.
Didn’t really understand your last two lines……..
LikeLike
agree. I beleive URA had genuine concerns, & perhaps had the guts to raise the flag, but instead of calling SLB for mingling with Togadia, he made a case full of arguments that are generally identified with a label.
LikeLike
G3CS, I’ve read in many places that the rise/revival of Hinduism eclipsed Buddhism. I’ve also read that some Tamil king(remember this is specific to TN) banished many Buddhists to Sri Lanka. But massacres? Where’d you pull that out from? And before you talk so matter of factly about these imagined ‘massacres’, can you be sure that they were of the same nature or scale of the Muslim massacres or the Portugese massacres in Goa etc.,.?
LikeLike
GK3S
You have taken the debate to the ‘atomic’ level. I have heard of these Buddhists being massacred and all that. Is there a definitive work or works which go into these killings?
I have some doubts on these ‘killlings’ but I will wait to hear from you.
Personally I feel SLB getting felicitations from Thogadia is fine.
LikeLike
DB. yesThe vichaardalli bhedha idroo garbhiNi hengasina garbha seeLi bhrooNa seeLOvantha vichaara yavudu illa saar. antahadella raakshasa prajne.
LikeLike
TS
Nimma kalpaney sariyaaghidey!
Let’s wait and see what GK3S has to say.
LikeLike
GK3S,
There was no massacre of the Buddhists at the hands of the Hindus and especially during the post-Shankara period. Buddhists were already a waning force at the time of Shankara’s birth. If any Hindu attack has happened on the buddhists, it has been more of an intellectual/theological one rather than anything physical. And also, Shankara fought more of the ritualistic schools (pUrva mImAMsa) to bring forth the upanishadic ideal in vedic religion than anything else.
In fact, Muslim invaders are more likely to receive the blame here also.
Apart from that, I agree with you that apologies by communities can result in a slippery slope scenario. When both the perpetrators and victims are gone, it just pays to acknowledge mistakes, correct them and move on. Of course, even this is not that simple, right?
LikeLike
KP,
I was wondering how come churumuri is not making sound about this. Vijay karnataka made most of the issue and the response has helped to understand that kannada literary word is very active.
What is the best way to handle a rift or an issue!
Lot of our literary icons had their own ways and showed that they are master minds! Few opinions from the literary giants!!!!!
Few suggested, they are yet to read the novel and hence will provide comments post reading!!! (Postponing the in-evitable)
SLB is a great writer but if URA’s opinion should also be considered (what does it mean???)
The best appraoch was from Ravi Belagere of ‘Hi Bangalore’
Took the approach of a primary school teacher witnessing quarrel between two of his kids.
Scolded both the kids, then said these two are the brightest kids he has seen in life, then punished them with brutal words and then again said these two kids consider themselves as models to the society… see what is that they have done!
He then says bhyrappa as a great writer but failed after ‘Saakshi’. He has not created great charecters after ‘sakshi’. Again he said, he has created wonderful charecters like Manjayaa, Satya etc.. (what is the significance of Saakshi the novel, is it the time that RB started writing??)
He asks readers… Did we require a bhyrappa to create Avarana’s charecters, to tell the truth of histrory!! then concludes that both are good for nothing.
Finally, he takes on his friend’s paper: Vijaya Karnataka (for which he is a columnist!): He suggest VK did a mistake of asking users opinion about the spat between URA and SLB. It should have been limited to critic’s comments and not the general public.
RB being ‘Janapriya’ author wants only critics to talk about the other authors.
I felt so happy to see the CEO level thoughts of our authors!!!
LikeLike
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_of_Buddhism_in_India
Granted that this is Wikipedia. But there is enough evidence on the side of persecution that if not widespread, it was at least prevalent enough to be discussed extensively and recorded.
Besides, all of us I think make the mistake of looking at inter-religious relationships in previous eras through the perspective of current relationships. Buddhism is minuscule enough that we are indifferent/benign about it and are content with pointing out quaint little stories of bonhomie. When Buddhism was a major religion in India with active political backing, it could have been quite another story.
But this thread is not about Buddhism, so………….
LikeLike
I think “Poverty of intellectualism in India” by Narla Venkateshwara Rao published by Prasaranga, Mysore University, talks about massacre of Buddhists by Hindus, particularly the burning of Nagarjuna Konda, a centre of Buddhist learning, by Shankara and his followers.
LikeLike
GK3S and GK
Thank you. I am now convinced–there is very little massacre of Buddhists by the Hindus. Unlike the Peaceful Religion types destroying idols and killing the “idolists”…
LikeLike
G3S..
that there were fierce ideological clashes between hindus and buddhists is no secret and not all that very disputed. but to take that further and claim that there were ‘massacres’ is biting off more than you can chew. and btw.. i did a ctrl-F for “massacre” on that article and got only one hit. Under the “Mohammad of Ghor” section.
LikeLike
sisya, there is also stuff about persecution, demolition of stupas, having bounties on the heads of Buddhists (this when Buddhists were not that rare)……..and I am not surprised that you found only one hit on “massacre” with a search. Wikipedia with its NPOV is big on political correctness.
LikeLike
Pingback: A for Anantamurthy, B for Bhyrappa, C for Controversy, D for Debate... « Rambling with Bellur
Gatekeeper, again, you’re talking through your a**. It seems to be a habit with you.
LikeLike
Dwarapalaka,
You are my desi alibi. But such a pity that you do not have an ayota of my decency. If you cannot participate in a comment stay away from it. Meanwhile, what was so offensive about my post?
LikeLike
Gatekeeper,
First, the spelling is “iota.”
Second, your hypocrisy is funny. Without compunction, and without using any argument, you lob a heinous insult at Adi Sankara, that greatest of our philosophical masters. Sankara’s tremendous works, and his worth, are well documented. Frankly, most folks do not have the intellectual or moral wherewithal to critique Sankara. Our poking holes in Sankara is akin to a second-standard kid condemning Einstein.
You are pretty well read, but you seem to have consumed too much of the half-baked reactionary literature often cited by Dalit separatist organizations. Your using the claim in Narla’s book (and many other things you have said in the past) gives me that impression. Maybe you have read this other work too, this book which at this very moment sits on my bookshelves: “The Buddhist Antiquities of Nagarjunakonda” (1938, by the archaeologist A.H. Longhurst; see p. 6).
The claims against Sankara in both those works are so poorly argued they would not stand peer review in any scientific journal today. They are fallacious, opinionated and unfounded in the evidence, and a reader can accept them only in ignorance of the scientific method.
I suggest you read more authoritative sources. I can name several but I cannot be your teacher. Only the great masters can be your teachers, and mine.
One such great master was Swami Vivekananda, that hero of our heritage — for his passion for logical analysis, his philosophical insight and of course his love for India. Let me quote what Vivekananda says about Adi Sankara:
“Sankara came, a great philosopher, and showed that the real essence of Buddhism and that of the Vedanta are not very different, but that the disciples did not understand the Master, and have degraded themselves, denied the existence of the soul and of God, and have become Atheists. That was what Sankara showed, and all the Buddhists began to come back to the old religion.” (Swami Vivekananda, “Lectures from Colombo to Almora,” 1908, p. 90)
As a matter of fact, some of Sankara’s philosophical opponents, including Bhaskara, Ramanuja and Madhwa, criticized Sankara as a Buddhist in disguise (“prachchanna bauddha”). You may not have the time — or the inclination — to read the primary sources, so here’s an article I found for you via Google search:
http://www.nagarjunainstitute.com/buddhisthim/backissues/vol11/v11sankara.htm#fntxt_1
After your readings are done, you may be able to agree that previously you were talking through your a**.
LikeLike
Gatekeeper:
I didn’t meant to offend you, sir. i am feeling bad that i sometimes inadvertantly speak like an indian: we are such emotional people we often get personal in arguments.
Sorry for any hurt my comment caused. please continue to respond.
LikeLike
Dwarapalaka,
Thanks for your reply and correcting me on my spelling.
Your point is well taken. But it is again a matter of opinion what we regard as scientific and what we regard otherwise. For instance, you call Sankara a great philosopher. I have no problems with that. That is your opinion. In the same breath, you call Narla Venkateswara Rao and Longhurst not worthy of mention, which is very problematic.
What you call as “more authoritative sources” is open to question. Can you tell me on what basis Vivekananda is more authoritative than Narla? Is it only because he is so well known? Vivekananda’s quote that you mention only places an opinion not backed by facts. Why should I accept him as more authoritative. I definitely do accept it as an opinion and would consider it that way but I am not ready to consider Vivekananda any more authoritative than Narla.
No faith disappears the way Buddhism has, particularly in the country of its birth. We can always say Buddhists reconverted to Hinduism after their philosophical position were shown be in line with Hindusim. But that’s a faulty argument for me. What about the Bhumihars of Bihar, Buddhist landlords who were denied reentry into Hindusim?
And why didn’t Hindusim hold a dialogue with the Sikhs and bring them back to the fold? Or the Jains for that matter. One of the greatest hypocrisy of Hindusim is calling Buddha an avatar of Vishnu, by which it subsumed an entire faith. Why is Mahaveera not an avatar? Because jainism was never a threat to Hinduism like Buddhism was.
And not that I am ignorant of the prachanna bauddha argument. But legend says that Siva appeared to Sankara as a chandala. But did Sankara do anything at all about uplifting Chandalas?
Reminds me on an incident. E.M. Namboodiripad, former CM of Kerala, once said Marx’s contribution was unmatched but by the Vedas. I can only laugh at such accommodative strategies.
LikeLike
@GATEKEEPER
THANKS FOR YOUR COMMENT. PLEASE SEE RESPONSES BELOW. PLEASE FORGIVE THE ALL-CAPS.
Thanks for your reply and correcting me on my spelling.
YOU’RE WELCOME: SORRY AGAIN FOR THE EARLIER TONE.
Your point is well taken.
ARE YOU SURE? :)
But it is again a matter of opinion what we regard as scientific and what we regard otherwise.
DISAGREE. THAT’S PRETTY MUCH DECIDED. SEE, AMONG OTHER WORKS, THOMAS KUHN, “THE STRUCTURE OF SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTIONS” (UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS, 1962)
For instance, you call Sankara a great philosopher.
SIR, I ACTUALLY SAID “GREATEST,” AND IN A PARTICULAR CONTEXT. :)
I have no problems with that. That is your opinion. In the same breath, you call Narla Venkateswara Rao and Longhurst not worthy of mention, which is very problematic.
I DIDN’T SAY THEY ARE NOT WORTHY OF MENTION. I ONLY SAID THAT IN THE INTEREST OF INTELLECTUAL RIGOR IN ONE’S ARGUMENT, THEY SHOULD NOT BE CITED IN THE SAME PARAGRAPH AS, SAY, A SANKARA. IN MY VIEW THOSE AUTHORS, ACCOMPLISHED THOUGH THEY MIGHT BE, ARE NOT QUALIFIED TO LEGIMATELY COMMENT ON SANKARA — IT WOULD BE AKIN TO MY CITING MY RANK-HOLDER S.S.L.C. BROTHER TO ARGUE THAT NEWTON WAS A DUMBASS.
What you call as “more authoritative sources” is open to question.
I ACCEPT.
Can you tell me on what basis Vivekananda is more authoritative than Narla?
IF YOU EXPLORE THE GAMUT OF VIVEKANANDA’S WRITINGS, ALL ON A THEME OF VEDANTA BUT ENCOMPASSING VARIOUS SUBJECTS INCLUDING HISTORY, YOU WILL KNOW FOF YOURSELF. IT’S KINDA TOO MUCH TO EXPLAIN HERE.
Is it only because he is so well known?
NOT AT ALL.
Vivekananda’s quote that you mention only places an opinion not backed by facts. Why should I accept him as more authoritative.
GOOD POINT. THAT OPINION CAME OUT OF MUCH MORE ELABORATE ARGUMENTS ELSEWHERE, IF YOU WILL EXPLORE SOME PRIMARY SOURCES. ALSO, FOR SECONDARY SOURCES, YOU MAY SEE VARIOUS EXCELLENT COMMENTARIES ON THE VEDANTA PUBLISHED BY THE RAMAKRISHNA MISSION, BY THE CHINMAYA MISSION, BY THE BHARATIYA VIDYA BHAVAN, AS WELL AS BY VARIOUS WESTERN SCHOLARS.
I definitely do accept it as an opinion and would consider it that way but I am not ready to consider Vivekananda any more authoritative than Narla.
IF YOU READ VIVEKANANDA MORE YOU WILL BECOME READY, BELIEVE ME.
No faith disappears the way Buddhism has, particularly in the country of its birth.
NOT TRUE. THOUSANDS OF FAITHS HAVE COME AND GONE, PAGAN, MYSTICAL, PROPHETIC, TRIBAL, REVEALATORY, JUDEO-CHRISTIAN, ETC. IN ALMOST EVERY CONTINENT IN EVERY ERA. SEE REFERENCES IN HOUSTON SMITH, “THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS” (HARPER, 1991), OR WORKS OF JOHN MILLER, OR SOME WRITINGS OF SWAMI PRABHAVANANDA OF THE RAMAKRISHNA MATH.
We can always say Buddhists reconverted to Hinduism after their philosophical position were shown be in line with Hindusim. But that’s a faulty argument for me.
I’D LIKE TO HEAR WHY, ESPECIALLY SINCE IT SEEMS BACKED BY A GOOD AMOUNT OF RESEARCH. FOR EXAMPLE, SEE CHARLES ELIOT, DAVID POND, EVEN DEEPAK CHOPRA.
What about the Bhumihars of Bihar, Buddhist landlords who were denied reentry into Hindusim?
I AM NOT AWARE OF THIS CLAIM, BUT WILL LOOK IT UP. THANK YOU.
And why didn’t Hindusim hold a dialogue with the Sikhs and bring them back to the fold? Or the Jains for that matter. One of the greatest hypocrisy of Hindusim is calling Buddha an avatar of Vishnu, by which it subsumed an entire faith. Why is Mahaveera not an avatar? Because jainism was never a threat to Hinduism like Buddhism was.
YOU MAKE A PRAGMATIC POINT THAT MAY, FROM A PODIUM, SWAY AN UNINFORMED AUDIENCE. I SUSPECT THAT IF WE READ THE VEDANTA, AS INTERPRETED THROUGH THE UPANISHADS, BRAHMASUTRAS OR PATANJALI’S YOGASUTRAS BY ANY NUMBER OF EXCELLENT COMMENTATORS (OR EVEN THE READABLE DAVID FRAWLEY), YOU MAY HAVE TO CHANGE YOUR VIEW. MAINSTREAM HINDU TRADITION HAS ALWAYS ARGUED THERE ARE MULTIPLE PATHS TO THE TRUTH, BECAUSE FAITH AND ANY GOD LIE WITHIN. THAT IS WHY THE SOPHISTICATION, AND INTELLECTUAL ACCESS, OF OUR RELIGIOUS TRADITIONS IS QUITE UNMATCHED BY THE DOGMATIC OR PROPHET-BASED FAITHS. AND THAT IS WHY DESPITE THE MUSLIMS, CATHOLICS AND OTHER CHRISTIANS, BUDDHA AND AMBEDKAR, AS WELL AS NUMEROUS “INTERNAL” CRITICS SUCH AS SANKARA, MADHWA, BASAVANNA, SRI RAMAKRISHNA, GANDHI, ETC. OUR TRADITIONS HAVE STOOD THE TEST OF TIME.
And not that I am ignorant of the prachanna bauddha argument. But legend says that Siva appeared to Sankara as a chandala. But did Sankara do anything at all about uplifting Chandalas?
I’M NOT AWARE OF THAT LEGEND, SIR, BUT WILL LOOK IT UP. THANKS. ANYWAYS.. THAT’S BESIDE THE POINT. AS I SAID CRITICIZING A PHENOMENON FOR WHAT HE OR SHE “DIDN’T” DO IS THE HEIGHT OF CYNICISM. — WHY DIDN’T EINSTEIN DO ANYTHING FOR THE BLACKS? WHY DIDN’T AMBEDKAR DO ANYTHING FOR FARM ANIMALS? IT IS SILLY.
Reminds me on an incident. E.M. Namboodiripad, former CM of Kerala, once said Marx’s contribution was unmatched but by the Vedas. I can only laugh at such accommodative strategies.
HAHA, THANKS. THAT’S INSIGHTFUL. I HAVEN’T READ ALL OF MARX, AND I CERTAINLY HAVEN’T READ EVEN A FRACTION OF THE VEDAS, BUT I CAN SEE HOW NAMBOODIRIPAD WAS PROBABLY DEAD SERIOUS. NAMBOODIRI, IN A MOMENT OF REVELATION, SEEMS TO REJECT MARX IN FAVOR OF HIS HINDU IDENTITY. MAYBE IT’S A KIND OF HYPOCRISY, BUT I THINK IT IS MORE LIKELY A FORM OF REVELATION OR SELF-AWARENESS. INCIDENTALLY, HYPOCRISY HAS BEEN A HALLMARK OF ALMOST ALL INDIAN MARXISTS — THEY ALL OWN HUGE AMOUNTS OF PROPERTY AND ALL REGULARLY VISIT TEMPLES/MOSQUES!
THANK YOU, AGAIN, FOR THE GOOD READING. AGAIN, SORRY FOR THE ALL-CAPS; I’M NOT “YELLING”! :)
LikeLike
what a wonderful debate by dwarapalak and gatekeeper. In the debate there was a mention about an alledged ‘massacre’ of budhists by sanatanis. Even the main theme of the novel aavarana revolves around the massacres of hindus by aurangzeb. SO I thought of giving my viewpoint here.
History talks about thousands of such massacres; in the name of politics, religion, jehads and holywars. Let’s see why are the massacre by Aurangzeb (or by any moghals and any other islami dynasties for that matter) signifficant? The answer is he used the holy Qur’an as the source for all his misdeeds. He killed hindus because he thought killing ‘kaafirs’ (non-muslims) and specially ‘mushreeks’ (people who worship idols) is a sacred work. The credibility of him being a true muslim is questional. (as there is no concept of kings in qur’an. There can be only khalifas who can rule the land on behalf of allah. Moreover, the moghals were alcoholic and were using hashish; both prohibited in islam ) but what is important here is, for all the massacre he did; he had a very strong motive: the holy Qur’an.
There is no aurangzeb today. but Qur’an is still intact and unaltered and looks all the same as in the days of Baber and Aurangzeb. There are many terrorist groups who use the same Qur’an as the source for killings all over the world.
Hindus also had some of the cruel sutras in the books like Manusastra. Some of the sutras were the basis of most of the political, judiciary and social structure of our historical dynasties of our country. (the other important scriptures being yajnavalkya and much later Arthashaastra) Hindus stopped practicing this sutras as it was an outdated concept and was an injustice to many classes of people. New and more humane concepts like democracy and equality came into picture. Today there is not even a single hindu who would accept that if a lower caste man listens to the recital of vedas his ears should be poured with molten copper.(Manushastra) This cruel statement along with many other age old cruel rituals are being discarded by the hindu society.
But when it come to Islam, why is there such a tendency to accept it completely when there are very cruel soorahs (verses) still existing in it? ( it is said in Qur’an that the qur’an should not be altered and edited) Like the one which says Muslim should fight with kaafirs and kill them in all the months of the year except Ramzhan period (ramlan in arabic). I laugh when the muslim intellectual say that it sounds cruel only because we took it out of context and they continue to say that we have to consider the time of the prophet aswell. This statement of theirs makes it clear that even Qur’an is subject to change with time. It is not completely an eternal truth. What I say is as the hindus became liberal enought to discard Manushastra, untouchability, Sati systems even Muslims should come out of the small bracket of islamic world and think in broader terms. There are many things like Parda, totally unfair polygamy marrieges and their look towards non-muslims; which need to be re-structured. Otherwise the terrorists activities will continue taking motivations from Qur’an.
I feel the truths about the massacres by Moghals and other islami kings should not be suppressed in the name of social harmony. Actually, the psuedo-secularists are spoiling the communal harmony by potraying Aurangzeb and other cruel kings as the leaders of modern muslim community. Sorry, They are not the leaders of Muslims but they are just a bad part of our history. I want all the intellectuals stop this deviding policy. Give our muslim brothers and sisters a chance to look at the bloodshed caused in the name of Jehad. Let the modern thinking reach to this community. This country and its great historical figures like Asoka, Shivaji, Vivekananda and our own president Abdul Kalam do not belong any one community. These leaders should be equally loved and honoured by all. But supporting a cruel king is not the right to way to show equality. The communal dispute arises only when you support an Aurangzeb just because he is a muslim king. If anyone supports him, by default he supports the massacre of hindus. Now how can you call yourself a secular person? So bringign the truths about Aurangzeb is very essential today as our political and psuedo-secularists and Marxists are busy in distorting history and using it to create a votebank.
LikeLike
Hi Dwarapalaka,
Thanks for your reply again. A couple of things I want to point out.
Firstly,
But it is again a matter of opinion what we regard as scientific and what we
regard otherwise.
DISAGREE. THAT’S PRETTY MUCH DECIDED. SEE, AMONG OTHER WORKS, THOMAS KUHN, “THE STRUCTURE OF SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTIONS” (UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS, 1962)
Probably you should read Gayatri Spivak’s “Selected Subaltern Studies” (OUP, 1988) which gives oral histories its due. One problem that social sciences have consistently faced is that their models, particularly research etiquettes, have been mindlessly imported from natural sciences. This book reinstitutes social sciences as its own entity which should chart their own research methodology and praxis rather than dumbly follow the natural sciences.
For instance, you call Sankara a great philosopher.
SIR, I ACTUALLY SAID “GREATEST,” AND IN A PARTICULAR CONTEXT. :)
I have no problems with that. That is your opinion. In the same breath, you call Narla Venkateswara Rao and Longhurst not worthy of mention, which is very problematic.
I DIDN’T SAY THEY ARE NOT WORTHY OF MENTION. I ONLY SAID THAT IN THE INTEREST OF INTELLECTUAL RIGOR IN ONE’S ARGUMENT, THEY SHOULD NOT BE CITED IN THE SAME PARAGRAPH AS, SAY, A SANKARA. IN MY VIEW THOSE AUTHORS, ACCOMPLISHED THOUGH THEY MIGHT BE, ARE NOT QUALIFIED TO LEGIMATELY COMMENT ON SANKARA — IT WOULD BE AKIN TO MY CITING MY RANK-HOLDER S.S.L.C. BROTHER TO ARGUE THAT NEWTON WAS A DUMBASS.
I don’t understand why they cannot comment on Sankara. On one hand you say we have a tradition of healthy criticism. On the other hand you seem to dismiss them. This is very consistent with the tradition of Hindusim; encourage criticism at a superficial level but ignore it. Your analogy of a rank-holding brother is a good one but is quiet misleading. I think even a child should be taken seriously, irrespective of whether he is criticising Sankara or Newton.
No faith disappears the way Buddhism has, particularly in the country of its birth.
NOT TRUE. THOUSANDS OF FAITHS HAVE COME AND GONE, PAGAN, MYSTICAL, PROPHETIC, TRIBAL, REVEALATORY, JUDEO-CHRISTIAN, ETC. IN ALMOST EVERY CONTINENT IN EVERY ERA. SEE REFERENCES IN HOUSTON SMITH, “THE WORLD’S RELIGIONS” (HARPER, 1991), OR WORKS OF JOHN MILLER, OR SOME WRITINGS OF SWAMI PRABHAVANANDA OF THE RAMAKRISHNA MATH.
Point well taken. Probably faiths have disappeared. But there is something missing when we try to chronicle the history of Buddhism’s demise in India, particularly when it so nicely flourished in China and other East Asian countries. One reason, probably something that works in hindsight, is that Buddhism is the only postmodernist religion that is low on explicit ethics, something Hinduism used to its advantage. But that is inadequate to explain how Buddhism disappeared. What about at people’e level. Not everyone was debating. So how were they goaded to reembrace Hinduism? Like most religions that disappeared were hounded by the religions that replaced them, we can see how a combination of factors worked to displace Buddhism.
And why didn’t Hindusim hold a dialogue with the Sikhs and bring them back to the fold? Or the Jains for that matter. One of the greatest hypocrisy of Hindusim is calling Buddha an avatar of Vishnu, by which it subsumed an entire faith. Why is Mahaveera not an avatar? Because jainism was never a threat to Hinduism like Buddhism was.
YOU MAKE A PRAGMATIC POINT THAT MAY, FROM A PODIUM, SWAY AN UNINFORMED AUDIENCE. I SUSPECT THAT IF WE READ THE VEDANTA, AS INTERPRETED THROUGH THE UPANISHADS, BRAHMASUTRAS OR PATANJALI’S YOGASUTRAS BY ANY NUMBER OF EXCELLENT COMMENTATORS (OR EVEN THE READABLE DAVID FRAWLEY), YOU MAY HAVE TO CHANGE YOUR VIEW. MAINSTREAM HINDU TRADITION HAS ALWAYS ARGUED THERE ARE MULTIPLE PATHS TO THE TRUTH, BECAUSE FAITH AND ANY GOD LIE WITHIN. THAT IS WHY THE SOPHISTICATION, AND INTELLECTUAL ACCESS, OF OUR RELIGIOUS TRADITIONS IS QUITE UNMATCHED BY THE DOGMATIC OR PROPHET-BASED FAITHS. AND THAT IS WHY DESPITE THE MUSLIMS, CATHOLICS AND OTHER CHRISTIANS, BUDDHA AND AMBEDKAR, AS WELL AS NUMEROUS “INTERNAL” CRITICS SUCH AS SANKARA, MADHWA, BASAVANNA, SRI RAMAKRISHNA, GANDHI, ETC. OUR TRADITIONS HAVE STOOD THE TEST OF TIME.
That is pulling the rug on the entire argument. We can revel in such platitudes but you still do not explain why Sikhs or Jains were not to be bothered by Hindus. Extending it further, if we believe that all paths lead to the same supreme Brahman, why were Buddhists not discouraged from defecting to Hinduism. Enlightened Hindus could have always said “Remain Buddhists. Doesn’t matter as you will still be Hindus.” That never happened and Hindusim never did rest unless the scare of Buddhism was entirely extingusihed.
And not that I am ignorant of the prachanna bauddha argument. But legend says that Siva appeared to Sankara as a chandala. But did Sankara do anything at all about uplifting Chandalas?
I’M NOT AWARE OF THAT LEGEND, SIR, BUT WILL LOOK IT UP. THANKS. ANYWAYS.. THAT’S BESIDE THE POINT. AS I SAID CRITICIZING A PHENOMENON FOR WHAT HE OR SHE “DIDN’T” DO IS THE HEIGHT OF CYNICISM. — WHY DIDN’T EINSTEIN DO ANYTHING FOR THE BLACKS? WHY DIDN’T AMBEDKAR DO ANYTHING FOR FARM ANIMALS? IT IS SILLY.
Again, a problem of analogy. It would definitely be silly to expect Ambedkar to speak for farm animals. But it would be hypocrisy on the part of Ambedkar if he did not speak about women and their oppression. So much of religion’s explicit goal is to maintain harmony and to ensure equality among people. Why did Sankara not do this? Why did he let the Brahmain order continue its domination over other people? You can be a spiritual master and preoccupy yourself with metaphysical issues. Otherwise, you can be a social reformer and use religion to attain social justice. We have enough instances to prove this. Why was Sankara silent when it came to social justice?
In the same breath, Ramanujacharya allowed Shudras entry into temples at a certain point of time every year. That proves a preoccupation with issues of social justice, however dismal it was. Do you think Ramanuja was silly to preoccupy himself with such an issue as equality?
Last point: Your sources are predominantly rightwing and pro-Hindu with which I have no problem. Just like you can always say that my sources are predominantly leftwing. But the point is I have at least covered some of the broad arguments that your sources place, though not in detail. I encourage you to do the same with my sources.
Thanks for keeping this impersonal and professional. I look forward to your response.
LikeLike
Gatekeeper,
Thanks, I’m trying to look up some of your sources this weekend.
I don’t know how you define “rightwing,” but many sources I cited — Smith, Miller, Pond, Kuhn, etc. — are far from conservative or pro-Hindu, even critical. Please look them up before you make any sweeping comment.
Even the Ramakrishna Math’s Vedantic literature is not pro-Hindu as such; it contains commentary about the Vedanta, which (as you know but may not accept) is an inclusive philosophy that predates dogmatic religions as well as Buddhism. Swami Prabhavananda is widely accepted as an important scholar of comparative religion. Look him up so we can talk sense.
I indulged in the “platitudes” you mention, but you fail to persuade me in your last but second paragraph. That’s your return platitude? :)
Later we should also talk about Buddhism’s (neo-Buddhism?) total and systematic rejection of Buddha’s ahimsa (especially toward animals) and other Eightfold Path corruptions after it left India, as well as other pragmatic corruptions introduced after its return.
LikeLike
Byrappa’s Avarana destroys many artificial sterotypes created by our great buddhijeevigalu. Lakshmi’s father and her community comes out as more liberal and open to change and they are more accepting as compared to Amir’s Muslim household. The stranglehold of the Muslim community leaders on Amir’s family is so true to life. I have witnessed so many such events in many of my Muslim Friend’s families and I even know an exact incident as depicted in Avarana on how the Community leaders forced the sharia on the newly married-converted hindu woman in a muslim hosehold. It is not so easy to be a liberal Muslim. It is well impossible and is an oxymoron.
To digress a bit from the novel, one of the areas that “Intellectuals” and “Historians” overlook is how our present has been shaped by the past. It is no use trying to figure whether Brahmins were meat eaters some 2000 years ago and became vegarians because of Buddhism. The fact is majority of them are vegetarian now and from many generations and most Buddhists are non vegetarians. Instead of focussing the debate on the ethics of vegetarianism they focus on maligning a community. For example, the much maligned Hindus (read Brahmins and Upper castes. The Dalits, BCs and OBCs are exempt for any proof for liberalism) of today are quite tolerant and liberal as compared to the Muslim and Christian communities and even so called Dalit and OBC communities. Most are quite apologetic about the caste system and open to reform. Most leaders of the Hindutva movement from vivekanada to golwalkar have condemned the caste system. But in order to pursue a very vindictive agenda against hinduism those voices have been reduced quite systematically to nothing so that Hinduism as a religion can be decimated and the mullahas and missionaries can have a field day harvesting souls teaching us their own radical religions.
It is also quite interesting to note that the modern athiestic literature in English by Dawkins, Hitchens and Sam Harris have portrayed a soft corner to the Polytheistic religions like Hinduism as their gods are more akin to Spinoza’s god. Where are the rationalists and atheists of India and How do they tread Hinduism Vis a Vis Islam and Christianity. A study in this field will reveal you such Hypocrysy and double speak.
Coming back to Bhyrappa, through avarana he has tried to swim against the current (URA and his commie friends who control the media). There have been innumerable novels and movies maligning the bad practices of Hindus (mainly brahmins; other are all considered progressive by virtue of their birth. We have had samskaras, phaniyamma, water and many many more such novels and movies which have become so sedate and boring now. But when the same artistic license is employed against the muslim community all hell breaks loose. Pray just analyze the community of Hinuds and Muslims now, how many brahmin widows shave their head. How many commit sati. Where is the practice of Untouchability in urban settings.
Hats off to Bhyrappa for a brave novel. Although I do agree that the plot has been influenced to some degree by the Da Vinci Code.
LikeLike
Hi all, I am a Kanndiga living in Brunei. I heard about Aavarana and bought a copy and read it. It is undoubtably a wonderful book, excellant creativity and writership. I have not read a single book which shows better caliber of penmanship. I am now interested in reading all of SLB’s books. Unfortunately I cant say that about Kambara, Karnad and others who are shitting bricks at the very best of the book from SLB.
Dear Mr. SLB Congrats and May GOD bless you with a very long life and health.. we need more from light you to take away our blindnes.
LikeLike
I would tell Mr.URA to just shut up and be quite, S.L.Byrappa is always a perfectionist what ever he writes in his novel he would do so much of research and then decides to write in his novels, for example vamshavruksha one of the best novel of Byrappa where in he has given so much of information about ajanta caves, where in those informations has not been mentioned i any history books, so about his writing skills there are no words to comment on it reason is he thinks about every thing so deeply and with all aspects and i can give you one more example of novel jalapatha where in he has mentioned about the IVF ( In vitro fertilisation) techniques in 1970.
so i would give suggestion to ura not to utter any word about byrappa and sit at home quitely
LikeLike
@gate keeper …
when u consider yourself n even others bhagvan there will not be any discrimination like obc or so on …..the principles itself says that each n everything is god including u n so u will be respectful with other …. if u understand that properly mostly u wouldn’t have raised such point…
topper 10th std brother saying Einstein is wrong is not ridiculous unless he understand his theory and and he has something to disprove it …..if u r completely unaware of the topic and commenting on that is truly silly ….if he may be intelligent but need to disprove it to say its wrong r8…
LikeLike
about the novel ”avarana” …i consider its an excellent book …and a writer has raised what problems may arise when the bitter truth comes alive ….of course he has not said any where the allah is wrong .or he is not great …the perspective of moghals are explained ..n even dualisms of a person actually experiencing the facts have been made point it makes us know how exactly ppl feel in that situation ….he has clearly mentioned we r not responsible for the cruel act of our ancestor ..we need to know the history in order to correct the mistakes happened before ….and it is unforgivable if u do the mistake what the ppl have done long back….it does not destroy the social harmony…..if we try to correct ourselves …..it roams around the basic humanity… how ppl think thru what the action will be carried out ….so gives better way of thinking …..man is here for searching the truth and so try to consider in a well balanced mind ..likewise everything is explained …what really happened …how exactly we need to analyze and come out of such situations …. he gives references tooo in support of its truth what our hitsrians should do what should cum in our syllabus …..studying falls history posting Aurangzeb a hero makes real heroes a villains….and that does not provide justice to the death they have paid for….
and i agreed to the topic raised why don’t they appose Paniyamma kinda movies when it is not at all in practice n why dont they c how exactly they begun ….i agree that was suitable for the situation explained in avarana but not any more …..seeing truth without alteration is most inviting behavior ….
so i consider AVARANA is one of the best book i read ….
thanks for sri S L Bhyrappa
LikeLike
Ananth MurthyGalu Eega Anatha Muthrigalagiddare
LikeLike
I wish someone could explain to me why this book by Bhyrappa, one of our greatest writers, caused as much controversy as it did. It is really harmless in the sense its supposedly intended antagonists do not speak or read Kannada, and those who can have not said a word except in Gauri Lankesh’s ad hominem collection of essays. The best part of the book is the character Professor Narayana Shastri.
URA must have known what he was going to say when he agreed to speak on the occasion of the release of a third rate critique of the book that indulges in name calling. His speech has been faithfully reported in many places including his own self-promoting website. Yet he said he had been misunderstood.
I am still waiting for somebody to explain why URA talks about Bhyrappa’s campaign against making URA chair of Sahithya Academy. Does he really believe we believe that he hasn’t read “Bhiththi?”
“Aavarana” wasn’t banned. As far as I know no Jihaad has occured and no fatwah against Bhyrappa has been issued. Kannadigas happily eat their dose for breakfast, anna saaru for lunch, and take a siesta. The Kaveri keeps flowing and its tributaries go on drying up. Sand thieves become rich. Nobody seems to listen to the outporings of poor Chidananda Murthy. Hampi is now worse than haalu Hampi.
Poor Professor Murthy. Nobody has offered to send him to Mecca free of charge.
Why try to protect a minority that can take care of itself, especially when it has not asked for such protection? Cynical exploitation of a group in search of self-glorification has become the hallmark of our public intellectuals.
Thayi Bhuvaneshwari should order URA, Vatal, and a whole bunch of such others to hold their peace for ever.
P.S. Bhyrappa donated his honorarium for presiding over the Sahithya Sammelana to Kannada Sahithya Parishad. He has also donated generously to the Anathashrama in Maisuru. Are there other literary glitterati in Kannada who have demonstrated similar generosity?
LikeLike
Mr. U.R. Anantha Murthy, the Jnanpith Award-winning former chairman of the Sahitya Akademi is the MASTER GENIUS OF KARNATAKA.
LikeLike
Can I know where I could have “Aavarana” by SL Bhyrappa in Delhi, as too much of its criticism has evoked my interest in the book.
LikeLike
U.R. Anantha Murthy is more politics than literature. The Jnanpith Award was wasted on him.
LikeLike
URA is an attention seeker, he just cribs about anything and everything. One should ignore him..
LikeLike
Dear Sanjay Umarani,
Actually the jnanpeeth award was not wasted on URA. Of late it is tailor made for people with connections, so it is not surprising that he and his friend Girish Karnad got it. No such accolades are necessary for SLB who is in a different class.
Ravi
LikeLike
Neither I am a voracious reader,nor i have read “AAVARANA” ,i happend to bump into “AAVARANA” on net , SLB is trying to bring truth to light on pseudo secularists So called open minded, intellectuals,environmentalists…etc, like URA,girish for the sake of satisifying the role(which they have been associated) vent their, no sense opinions against persons like SLB
Instead of being a critique of SLB y cant they make ruckus on indian government (pseudo secular) which gives subsidy(relatively more ) to HAJ pligrims and to manasarovar yaatris(compartively less & for the sake of giving subsidy) and nothing to other religion
The bottom line is pseudo secularists thrive at the cost(indirectly) of poor people and deserved ones
LikeLike
The first and the foremost question I have to ask here is, why always Hindus point towards good work done by another Hindu? Does being “secular” mean anti-hindu? It seems so. Take our PM or URA or Girish Karnad………birds of same feather……Read the article by Francois Gautier…. “are hindus cowards”? You find answers to URA’s question………and Gandhi telling “Hindus are cowards”……… Mostly it seems like these people do not want to know the real hidden truth in the history. Unless and until you are told the truth, no revolution will happen. No terror can be abolished.
Come on Bharateeyare, it is time to understand the truth not the biased history lessons formulated by British(biggest example- Aryan invasion theory – a total crap) which was propagated further by Nehru because of which we are suffering the terrorism in India. Whatever is told in “Aavarana” is 100% true and truth is always truth whether someone opposes it or not. Great work Dr. Bhrappanavare………… The references mentioned in the book also say that. Bhyrappa himself says in one of the TV interview, that he was removed from the chairmanship of the syllabus committe of NCERT for trying to implement the true story about muslim invasions in the history books of school (search in goole videos). Is it fair? 80 million hindus being killed in 500 years (1000 and 1525 AD) and lacs of temples being brought down… is it not a biggest holocaust in the history of mankind….. How many of us know this truth?We study Hitler’s story and show sympathy to Jews, which is fair, but what about the dharma which says we should not harm anyone unless until you are harmed and has faced such a big holocaust……….
I hope the syllabus committee in all states will soon understand these loop holes and say that “prayaga” should be called “prayaga” not allahabad……
“dharmo rakshati rakshitaha”
LikeLike
I have read “Aavarana” . Its really a good book. Every true indian must read it. It tells the true history.
But for people (like URA) who wants to hide true history it looks bad. when it comes to minority’s rights they open thier mouth.
But when Hindus are attacked , they will be deaf and dumb. shame on them!!
LikeLike
After reading Avarana recently and having read URA’s speech and some of the reactions hereabove, I have the following thoughts:
1. Ordinary readers need not take either or one of the sides of Bhyrappa or Anantamurty or their likes
2. Anantamurty is right in saying that Avarana is not much of a novel but a debate hidden in the format of a novel (not even the style)
3. For example how Lakshmi leads and lets Shastri’s Hindu/Christian daughter to marry her Muslim son, knowing very well that the daughter is more likely to suffer in Saudi Arabia, the fate she herself suffered at the hands of Amin in India. Several charectarisation and turns like this are beyond imagination!
3. So what, it is already admitted by the novelist in the novel itself and readers are liking it as a debate in the form of a novel
4. Readers need to understand Bhyrappa’s main intentions of writing the novel – it is in the meaning of the term Avarana – to know the truth
5. Having said that, it is also clear in the novel that the majority of muslims in India today are not be blamed but they are actually victims of the Islamic force of yester years. As examples the characters of Rajput prince and Lakshmi/Raziya themselves.
6. So do readers need to get instigated and develop communal mentality or sympathise with the muslims whose ancestors used to be Hindus ?
7. I have seen and experienced many Muslim friends (even from Pakistan) very friendly towards Hindus of Indians. They may be very religious but they shower special affection to Hindus and feel delighted if a Hindu reciprocates friendship. But most Hindus try to keep them at distance either due to ‘madivantike’ or due to inexplicable and unreasonable ‘scare’ or ‘distrust’.
8. Is this how the majority of Hindus should be treating their Ex-Hindu populations? Does not matter there is no hope that any of them will convert back to Hinduism.
9. The same mentality existed even in the past centuries, due to which there was no re-conversion possible and thus even the first generation converts became hard-on muslims.
10. There are exceptions to everything- Dr. Abdul Kalam, Kabir Das, Shishuvinala Sharifa, Dr. Nisar Ahmed, Shiradi Sai Baba and the most current Ibrahim Lingapura, Ajim Premji,…. numerous. May be these personalities were embraced with friendship by their Hindu neighbourhood. Bollywood actor Salman performed Ganesha idol pooja in his house along with his Brahmin Marathi converted to Mulsim mother
Salma.
11. We learn the truth from Avarana. But just for the heck of it. Not to be aggrevated. The novel does not preach us to hate any group as a whole. Anantamurty and the likes also to note this point. Nothing wrong in saying or understanding the truth.
LikeLike
I’ve read “Avarana” in Kannada from Feb.29, 2007 to March 5, 2007. It is again as same as Dharmashree of Bhyrappa. One should appreciate the research work (for reading so much of voluminous big books, visiting those places for such a long time nearly 5 years). The authors intention is to know truth. As he got Ph. D for his thesis “Satya mattu soundarya”. The name of the novel means uncovering the truth. But the present Muslim community is not blamed for the acts of their ancestors. They should not repeat those mistakes. So every Muslim should read this book. Regarding U R Ananta Moorty and Girish Karnad, they are good in some areas like writing(novel Samskara) and drama (written dramas and acted in some). They have good relations with some people and if they got Jnanapit Award, then it is not that they bought it but they deserved it. But inspite of this, SLB should and more specifically MUST, get NOBLE PRIZE than Jnanapit. I’ve read Bhitti wherein all clashes are mentioned. I greatly appreciate there are so big men who have read so many books like Ananda, Gokulam 3rd stage, gatekeeper and dwarapalaka. Nice if they could guide me to fulfil my self actualisation goals. Especially the debate between gatekeeper and dwarapalaka, my God, I am stunned. I’ve read another novel by Dr Shankar Mokashi Punekar-from Dharwad named “Avadheshwari”. Marvellous! as it was. The political novel of the Vedic times. We all know of “Rama” of Ramayana. The novel revolves around the politics of the ancestors of Rama. May be 32nd grand fathers, I think. If anybody could find one, please read it.
***
It got Kendra Sahitya Akademi Award in 1988, no details are available in wikipedia.
LikeLike
Shashidhar Hiremath avare, neevu heLidri:
“But the present Muslim community is not blamed for the acts of their ancestors. They should not repeat those mistakes. So every Muslim should read this book.”
This is a tall order and a wishful thinking. When we detach ourselves from the all the noise and look at the ‘trend chart’, as they do in every department of science and business, this is not possible. ‘Repeating mistakes’ is out of question- because one side saying that they are past mistakes does not mean other side actually agrees! To the ‘follower’, there was no mistake; ‘house of war’ should be a ‘house of war’ till everything is ‘cleaned-up’ and a ‘house of peace’ is achieved. This is built within the ‘fundamental architecture’ of the follower’s faith. And unless a massive re-architecting is done, nothing can change. Those who are in engineering field understand the difficulty and in most cases futility of re-architecting effort. Many old-building are demolished and re-built for the same reason. Many software re-architecting projects fail miserably for the same reason.
One more thing. Same book can be read by two people and both can walk away with completely opposite conclusions. To the ‘follower’, truth and facts laid out by Sri Bhyrappa _might_ only reinforce the beliefs.
Regards,
– Shyodha (tanikhe@gmail.com)
http://aavaranavimarshe.blogspot.com/
LikeLike
Hi All,
we are making a debet on SLB’s novel AVARANA and we have found out so many pros and cons, but the main thing that can be observed is that the pros and cons is only on the way how the novel is written apart from the content inside the novel.
As “shyodha” says, its not necessary to blame the present muslim community, but they should have learn from history, Also the hindu’s should learn from the history
learn lessons from the history and apply the same to the present situation to maks sure that the history will never repeat again.
in current situation or take any instances from history hindus was not the initiator of any war or any Riots or any mob it was all initiated by other community people, here we can get the glimpses of the threat that we may have in future if we will not act now to stop those things.
LikeLike
I had posted some comments criticising URA’s views in his blog and he has moderated and rejected that. No wonder you find only comments that glorify him and express symapthy with him. What kind of an intellectual he is who cannot stand criticism or give a reply to criticism.
LikeLike
What happened to Gatekeeper and Dwarapalaka’s arguments? I found it pretty informative – and I hope both of them are back from weekends. Its good to see two informed fight as it benefits others with huge list of references and insights.
LikeLike
I want to catch the one who awarded Shastry The Gnaanapeetha
LikeLike
Dr. Byrappa will never get Jnanpeet award for he being so openly writing the truth.
LikeLike
mr. u.r ananta murthy do not know any thing.. he is a mad .. he dont have any rights to comment on d great bhyrappa. bhyrappa is a famous writer. lakhs n lakhs of people will read his books. bcoz d topics inside d text is very much truth.
where as ananta murthy books is being put to fire for cooking.he is a not at all a hindu.. he should change his name. i think he does not even know d meaning of his name itself..
poor fellow. we must pity for calling him an intellectual. he is jealous about great bhyrappa for his fame. anantha murthy will never accept d truth bcoz he is a big politician. d general rule for such politicians is lying.
anantha murthy is n o more a hindu. he should be ashamed himself..
wat did he find extra quality in his parangi wife…?
LikeLike
jnanpeeta awards have become farce since it was awarded to ura.read dr karanth coment on this subject on his patravyavahar.i heard speech here in houston kannada koota .geerish karnad corrected ura in two ocassion.looks to me ura is an alchoholic.
LikeLike
URA is a very cheap in mentality. He was blaming DeveGowda and later he has joined his hands with him. He is opportunist. So, we have ignore the comments from any opportunist
LikeLike
The one who reads Dr. Bhyrappa’s books can clearly identifies that he is not just a writer but also a researcher. Many of his books including “Avarna” has embedded in them the outcome and findings of his research. The research material and his knowledge is expressed as a novel in his work portraying facts and truth. As Dr. SL Bayrappa claims he is one who searches for truth, Writes on the ground of truth and that’s why he is being accepted and acknowledged by the true book lovers. If we are responsible people, we must exhibit the facts and accept truth in front of our coming generations, else not its not possible for the community to improve.
LikeLike
I completly agree with the above comments from Mallik S. This is the mind set every reader should have. This open us to the real flavour of literature.
LikeLike
Yes, The Novel is True and so are the above words of Mr.Mallik. Dr.Bhyrappa search for truth, research on truth and the expression of the facts are the reasons for the great success of this book and many other of his books.
There is NO writer like him today. The rest who critisize him are NOT writers anyway.
LikeLike
Well after three years of efforts I got the book and read today .It was simply superb and informative.Though I knew some deeds of Tippu earlier the info about efforts of Marata peshwas for regaining the holy places of Kashi was something new.
Nana Fadnavis was even ready to support English people in their fight against to Tippu for the cause of Prayag(I dont want to call it Allahabad anymore) is something new for me and well kept secret by text book writers.
Tippu contacted French King Nepolean to come and attack British in India ony to save his kingdom not becuse of any love for country.
Well the character of Prof Shastri reminds that of URA, and character of Aamir reminds me Salim and Javed Akhtar duo.They marry some other religion girls initially and suddenly realise islam later.
When Javed-Shabana come and pose in every channels like social reformers, secular icons ,I often think why country like India needs to create seperate marriage law for muslims where in they can marry any number of times.Recent Haryana DCM did the same thing .As far of my knowledge goes no other advanced country allows this kind second marriage before taking legal divorce.
Good book and Thanks to SLB for presenting facts.We have to learn from history else history can repeat.
LikeLike
URA has not produced any good stuuf to read , he dont have any right’s to question SLB Writings
LikeLike
My wife had both men as instructors in Mysore. (They both would remember her.) She said that neither man is larger than life, i.e. both – as we say here in America – put their man pants on one leg at a time.
I have not read the novel in question. (I do not read Kanada.) But I have read both, ‘Vamshavriksha’ and ‘Samskara’ and I can tell you without hesitation that both men have managed to touch God in their artistic pursuits.
LikeLike
No one bother about barking dogs
LikeLike
People like URA, will bluff the things, so called budhi jeevi’s should at least start thinking from now on.
R\
LikeLike
great debate.KANNADIGAS TRULY GREATEST.NO OTHER LANGUAGE WOULD HAVE HAD THIS MUCH DEBATE OVER LITERATURE or WRITERS.THIS SHOWS WHY KANNADA LANGUAGE HAS SO MANY JNANAPEETH AWARD WINNERS.KANNADA PEOPLE ARE REAL FOLLOWERS OF WHAT IS HAPPENNING IN THE LITERARY FIELD,WHEN ALL LANGUAGES ARE BUSY FOLLOWING THEIR STUPID FILMS.
LikeLike
URA is married to a christian and his inner hindu ideologies are severely diluted. He cannot stand if someone is attempting to protect the hindu sentiments and expecially if that someone is Bhyrappa a literary gaint.
LikeLike
we all know that whats the value that all the kannadigas giving respect to so called buddijives
LikeLike
It is better for us stop studying Dr. SLB in comparison with M/s. URA, GK, GKGR and others who are branded as “armchair/pseudo-intellectuals. Whether Dr. SLB gets JPA or not, people of Karnataka are least concerned and most of them feel that it is better if that JPA is not awarded at all to Dr. SLB after it is awarded to others like Mr. URA etc., Dr. SLB is read, respected and recognised as a Writer par-excellence who has produced Volumes of QUALITY. We very much doubt whether it is the same with Mr. URA. It can be taken for granted that his is a case of neither quality nor quantity. Still he puts in his best efforts to be in the limelight always. The arguments/controversies are as futile as the discussion about Glittering Gold and Black iron. The books of Dr. SLB are eagerly awaited by readers and his very name evokes respect and recognition. Kannadigas should feel deeply proud that Dr. SLB brought the FIRST ‘ SARASWATHI SAMMAN ” to Kannada. As an ardent Admirer of Dr. SLB and his writings, I Pray Lord Alimgity to Bestow on him LONGEST LIFE so that Kannadigas would be the proudest to read more and more New Books from him.
LikeLike
It is not correct for URA or any writer to say that SLB is a debater and not a story teller in AVARANA. it is well known thatevery writer brings into his story his experience, opinion,likes and dislikes, issues and their pros and cons, debates thereof etc through plots and charecters he designs. Can URA say that .the process which produced Samskara followed any different route?? was there no goal opinion or debate or plot or like or dislike in that story??? Would it be too wrong to say that those who are expressing views against AAVARANA are live examples of Professor Shastri & his illk depicted in AAVARANA in thought word and deed.I feel tthere is NO such thing as creative writing as everything in this history and future of the phenomenal world is recreation or re manifestation. It is ignorance and ahankara which makes one feel that one is creating something, Of course the figures of speach and style can carry some art. Actually the right word would be that one is experiencing and expressing something so far not felt and so it appears new to that persons .
LikeLike
Baayi bitre bannagedu, URA and others must stop talking about SLB
LikeLike
FURTHER —‘”Bhyrappa does not know either Hindu religion” thunders the much adored URA. Among the hundreds of situations in the novel which can be adduced to prove the author’s deep understanding of the open , free hindoo mata, ( in otherwords- of the hindoo dynamic ever fresh and open vichaara -not dogma, the conceited I know it all/my gad is gad attitude) even one, where the writer , through the character of Shesha Shastri -explains the hindoo- mata on the dharmasookshma of praayaschitta , of(1) self purification when one realizes one has done wrong ( any wrong –dont confuse it with the specific deviation) and (2)of the societal punishment and acceptance thereon , (Pg 167/168 paper back)which shows the servo actions between the self ( conscience) and the very same self(Pure Consciousness)- ——-should be revealing and may be blinding to URA and his types that is if they have conscience and consciousness. On the other hand, URA’s own knowledge of religion /class can be felt in the manner he makes Praneshachaarya, the sober, wise, highly learned man who is worried in the task of finding a dharma sookshma, who is starving, who tends fondly his ailing wife, who seeks divinity’s help for clarity in thought——- to get cheap libido, totally unfreaudean and preposterous and goes on painting all other learned as buffoons. That is because , when you start slander story you do not know how to end in rhythm, but you can win accolades from imposters
LikeLike
I dont dispute most Muslims are friendly towards Hindus. But when it comes to marriage, they insist conversion in their terms. Lakshmi in Avarana makes so many compromises but,sadly, the same is not the case of her husband. I know a bit about the Film Institute. Too bad the girl gets carried away by the neutral atmosphere. Morethan a debate, it is a tragedy.
LikeLike