Media, Social Media and our living rooms

If you are someone who has followed Kannada movies and tele-serials, you may know an actor of repute by name Shobha Raghavendra.  In real life, she is a delightful, open minded person. She is related from my wife's side and I really admire her sense of humor in-spite of many personal challenges she and her family have faced.  Once, when we met, she narrated how her virtual characters on screen, which are mostly evil in nature, get reaction in real life.  When she is shopping in the streets or in a nearby mart, people have accosted her and abused her about the way she treated the 'innocent', 'good' characters in a given episode.  Some encounters included responding to physical threats.   Fortunately, Ms. Raghavendra is a good sport and sees the positives in terms of how convincing her negative roles were.  Although, she wishes people drew the distinction between virtual and real lives.

Let us look at our own lives and recent events.  Especially, those which are currently hot on social media.  The recent unnatural death of IAS officer D. K. Ravi, for example.  Almost everyone has an opinion.  Friends, families are split in their opinions on what really happened, who is wrong, what needs to be done.  Facebook, whatsapp is full with blogs, comments, photo links, opinions, and criticism.  TV news coverage is 'live' with interviews, expert opinion, debate, political commentary, blame, counter claim, conspiracy theories,  comments, coverage of affected families including the family dog.  There is no respite from the  drama, trauma of the whole situation.
I'm totally in support of freedom of expression.  Whether it is correct, incorrect, comic, tragic, satirical, one has the right to express.  However, my concern is freedom of thought, which is even subtle than expression and speech.  Without even realizing, this is getting hijacked.  Pre-biased, opinionated facts, figures are beamed right up in your living rooms.  Social media gives you a even better platform to add your comments, selfies, first person, third person accounts on every 'happening' event.   Very recently I saw a teen posting a selfie with his dead periyappa titled 'feeling very sad'.  Of course young man, you are sad.  Why make a public spectacle of yourself and your dead  periyappa?  When there is a gruesome accident or mob incident, the crowd instantaneously reaches for the 'smart' phone.  Not to call the ambulance or police for help. But videograph, photograph the event. Become instant celebrities, be part of events which may just be your lucky ticket to eternal celebrity-dom. When the mother was wailing for her dead son, did you notice the number of cameras, microphone recording her every action, cry of despair?  The same is edited and played in a loop - time and again amplifying this emotion thousand times.  The entire society is trapped in this virtual emotion. You have no choice and are forcefully made witness, judge and jury reliving the entire saga, again and again.  You need only wait until the next big thing happens.  The earlier event fades away from collective psyche.  The new event replaces it and cycle repeats again.

What happened to sense of privacy? What happened to basic human decency?  Reacting and commenting along with popular sentiment is the new norm.  Everyone wants full disclosure, full details, with everyone becoming the know it all.  A judgement is given instantly in favor of the victim - never mind we didn't know the victim 2 weeks back.  The social mob can now decide who the perpetrator is, even if faceless.  The social mob now wants justice to be delivered this very instant. Existing law, justice system be damned, 'cos existing systems are not working.  'The nation wants to know' - no matter no one is willing to listen, everyone wants an answer which they already know.

My basic point is this.  Please wake-up, you are being played.  Welcome to the new information age where every happening event is an opportunity for media TRP and political brownie points.  Your emotional intelligence is being unwittingly leveraged in this game.  The solutions to issues need to come from grass roots.  It is easy to blame the system and externalize the problem.  Part of the solution lies within yourself and hidden.  Connect with your real families, friends and community.  Sure, use social media as a tool for the same.  Do remember that the social media and the HDTV you have in your living room is truly 'virtual'.  Don't sacrifice your real life to a virtual world.

Just a Thought - What is in the name "Hindu" or "India"

These are some thoughts based on some recent readings ('Being Different' by Rajiv Malhotra) and some recent discussions over WhatsApp, verbal discussions with friends and relatives and some random observations and inferences (some could be correct, some could be wrong, some in between).

2014 has been a rather pivotal year in 'India' for its well known political events.  A few words which  have entered standard vocabulary and is subject of debates/discussion in present times include "Hindutva", "Jihad", "Secularism", "Communal", "Saffronization" etc. and its variants.

The word Hindu and its derivatives evokes a range of emotions among people from this country (India) and others having connections with the sub-continent.  Many believe that they are following an ancient religion called 'Hinduism'. Others  believe  'Hinduism is a way of life'.  Some others  believe in 'communal forces'  at play  using 'hindutva' card/identity for vote bank politics.

There is a nice speech by Union Minister Venkaiah Naidu in a parliament speech defending the term Hindu while responding to questions around the controversy of Religious Conversions in India.  What caught my attention was his treatment of  the word Hindu.

With the above background, here is the thought...  For a given culture, community, group of people, is the name so important?  After all 'What is in a name?'  is it not just another word which represents a collection of ideas, ethos, beliefs or value.  If there is another word which can substitute, replace it with a higher purpose, can it  replace earlier terms retaining the same ethos, beliefs and value. To be very specific, What is in the name "Hindu" or "India" - does it mean different things to different people ? Is this word causing divisiveness and much consternation in present times in India?

For those who believe, that "there is nothing in a name, it can be replaced with any other word which means the same thing, subject to acceptability and intuitiveness",   I think this question is answered and there is no need to further debate.

For those who believe that words "Hindu", "Hindustan", "Hindustani", "Hindutva", "India", "Indianness" is a matter of our core identity, I have a rather radical (I concede not an original) proposition.

If one believes in the concept of 'Hindu as a way of life', and do see that the word 'Hindutva' is rather polarizing why not replace it with a better word.   The word to replace 'Hindu' wherever you find it is 'Dharma'.  I understand there is the need to draw distinction between the nationality aspect (Being a citizen of India, or India origin) vs. being identified as follower of a certain faith or belief.  So, for the purposes of nationality, there is a better word rather than India.  The alternate word for India, Indian is "Bharata" or "Bharateeya".   Now these words are not totally alien.  The resistance to use these alternate words could come from both majority as well as minorities (including citizens who identify themselves as Christian, Muslim first, then India Citizens).  For Christian and Muslim friends from India, I'd have no issues in calling them  "Christian Bharateeya",  "Muslim Bharateeya" as sub-identities.  For the remaining majority, if at all there is an identity I'd call it "Sanatana Dharmi Bharateeya" or simply "Dharmi Bharateeya".  This significant majority if they want further sub-identity could further split Dharma tradition to Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Lingayath, Gowda, Yadav, Dalith - you name it..

If you ask me what do you do with the current words "Hindu" and "India" in this proposition;  my answer is let it be as is.  One doesn't have to hate, banish, discard or officially replace it.  Just let it be as is.  Just remove the emotional, physical attachment to these two words and replace that emotional, physical and spiritual trust in two words proposed above "Dharma" and "Bharata".  I think this will change our individual mindset and in due time, our collective mindsets as well.

If you further ask what is wrong in the name "Hindu" and "India"? Here is my response.  There is nothing wrong with those words.  However, there is nothing correct with those words either.   Especially, if you believe in the camp that there is 'something in a name', 'a name means something more deep', my belief is there is nothing in these words.  Almost all words used in this country, region has a certain meaning, certain context, certain philosophy about the same.  However, not the two words "Hindu" and "India" in which both country and culture has invested so much.   These words are not organic to the region called India and it is an identity given by people foreign to the region.  Puzzled ?  Read further...

If you check wikipedia or google the term 'Hindu etymology',   you will discover that the word has a Persian origin.  When first used, it essentially meant people on the other side of River 'Sindhu'.  This includes present Pakistan beyond the river Indus.  Sindhu --> Hindoo --> Hindu.  Even the name Indus and India are derivatives of the same name Sindhu.  I'm no anthropologist, however, as per documented literary works, no work worth its salt identified people of this place as "Hindu" until Circa 1450.  No ancient literature or scriptures of this region, be it Vedas, Upanishad, Ramayana, Mahabharatha has a word called Hindu.  So, if you are a traditionalist, why such a big attachment to a word which really doesn't mean much ?  On the contrary, you find ample references to both the words 'Dharma' as well as 'Bharata'.  By the way, have you listened to the national anthem of India ?  The word  India or Hindu is not in that song as well !

There are other questions that could come and I have thought about it.  However in the interest of  time one has reading this article, I'll defer further details (may be as comments based on interest and criticism).  So, I'll conclude with some Q and brief A considered before putting this blog together - Answers, deep dives, in a separate blog (perhaps).

Questions (and brief answers) considered in the above context:

• Are Religion and Dharma same thing?  (Ans:  No.  Dharma is a non-translatable word to English)
• Is Hindu a Religion or not? (Ans: For ones who want it to be religion, let it be.  However, in my opinion, it is not a religion.  Jainism, Buddhism, Sikhism, Vaishnavism, Shaivism are probably close to religions.  Hindu the word is very contextual and causes much divisiveness at times.  This proposal replaces it with a word that makes it context free).
• What about Christian Dharma, Islam Dharma (Ans: No. Christianity, Islam, Judaism are religions they cannot be called Dharma. Yes, there could be certain aspects in what these religions preach, which also has a Dharma feel.  However, in its entirety,  religions are different from each other.  The super-set of eternal and universal principles is what is called Dharma).
• Are there different interpretations within Dharma.  Is the topic 'What is Dharma, and Adharma' debatable?  (Ans: Absolutely.  There are many schools of thought within Dharma practitioners.   Sometimes  they even seem to be at contradiction with each other.  Debate, Questioning is certainly part of Dharma).
• Can a follower of a religion also be Dharmic in some sense (Ans: Yes.  There is no litmus test for a Dharmic person.  Some non-Bharateeya personalities I can associate with Dharma are Abraham Lincoln, Albert Einstein.  This is purely my personal opinion based on what I know of such personalities.  Majority of people I have come across in my personal life as colleagues and friends, with different religious practices, regions, countries are following dharma in some sense or other).
• Can a person follow Dharmic rituals and still be Adharmic in principle as an example (Ans: Yes, absolutely.  Ravana of Ramayana fame is supposed to have known Vedas, but he is still considered to be adharmic.  Many such personalities, past and present exist both among dharma practitioners as well as other religions).
• What are basic tenets of Dharma?  (Ans:  Definition of Dharma is wide, deep and is subjective at times.  However, from this article's context, Dharma in a theological, spiritual perspective includes concepts like Shraddha, Bhakti, Karma, Atma which are not really translatable to English and there are no equivalents in other religions).

Bottom line : Whenever you find in a spot defending the belief system of this country (called India), try replacing the word Hindu with Dharma (or Sanatana Dharma).  Instead of word India, try replacing it with the word Bharata and see if you get some closure.  You can use it for both  self (introspection) as well as while discussing with another person or group.

Now tell me if there is something in a Name or not as an identity.