Guest guest Posted April 22, 2006 Report Share Posted April 22, 2006 MUMBAI (Saturday, April 22, 2006): Adi Shankarachrya said: "God, I have sinned trying to put clothes on you." And there are 900 complaints against [91-year-old Indian artist M.F.] Husain who innocently chose not to put clothes on the painting of a Goddess. Adi Shankaracharya, who propounded the Advita philosophy, said: "God, I have sinned trying to put clothes on you; I have sinned giving form to one who has no form." And there are 900 complaints against him — an artist — who chose not to put clothes on a God or a Goddess. They are accusing him of not putting clothes on a Goddess — the formless one. What Husain does is modern art - with nowhere forms. Even if he puts clothes on someone, that person may look stark naked. It could be an unseen reality, a figment of the imagination. And above all — innocence. Why are they after Husain's blood? A cartoon in a Danish paper was objectionable. The artist who made it wanted to insult the prophet, show his face as resembling a terrorist. There was a clear motive there - an effort to hurt, an effort to ridicule Islam. And there are some who produce toilet paper with the image of God, Rama embossed on it or show Durga on whisky posters. But when Husain paints Goddess Lakshmi or Saraswati, he has no such objectionable motive. He has not the slightest intention to be disrespectful. Like Adi Shankaracharya, he is not happy about putting man-made appeal on them. Perhaps that is why he is painting them nude. That's it, the important thing is the motive. Three top artists of our country are Muslims — Husain, Raza and Tyeb Mehta. I know the first two — Husain and Raza - very well. Both of them are interested in Hinduism - not so much perhaps the rituals - but its philosophy and mystery. Raza's Bindu series, which stunned the world and got him great acclaim would never have emerged if he was not deeply interested in the accumulated, universal, cosmic knowledge of Hindu thinkers down the ages. And then Tyeb Mehta is painting Kali, the terrible Goddess and it would not have attracted global attention if he did not have a brush with the Hindu philosophy. None of these artists would ever dream of desecrating other religious and intentionally hurting anyone. As for nudity, India has an unabashed leader record. Go and see what's on the walls of temples and important monuments. And at Kajuraho, Gods, Goddesses, apsaras and others are not only nude, but are engaged in sensuous poses. The sculptors who have done these immortal works are not insulting Gods and Goddesses. Actually, it is claimed, reveal a spiritual scenario. The sculptors of the past were not inhabited and they were free to express themselves. Their revelations, their exposures do not amount to even one per cent of nudity in Husain's works. In India, there is a bold, uninhibited approach to nudity. We do not see it as physical. For instance, there is nothing physical about the phallus we worship - Shiv lingam. It is perhaps the thought behind it, the mystery and wonder that we see in it. And there is the divine Mahavira who stands tall atop rocks who is worshipped by millions of people belonging to all religions. It is all the same kind of innocence which is there in Husain's paintings. - A.R.Kanangi SOURCE: Cybernoon URL: http://www.cybernoon.com/DisplayArticle.asp? section=fromthepress&subsection=editorials&xfile=April2006_roundup_st andard134&child=roundup ------------------------ Sponsor --------------------~--> Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click./lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/XUWolB/TM --~-> <*> / <*> <*> Your Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 22, 2006 Report Share Posted April 22, 2006 I do not aree for inocence of M.F.Husain.Hindu Dharma is a dust bin that anyone came and put his dirty mind.More we fill too much sad when those our people protect them on the base of freedom. In our group no one here who can see his mother nacked ? If some one here that impotent. <*> / <*> <*> Your Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 22, 2006 Report Share Posted April 22, 2006 As usual, we have people who equate being prude with being moral... - vapatel (AT) omifco (DOT) com Saturday, April 22, 2006 9:19 AM Re: Putting Clothes on a Goddess I do not aree for inocence of M.F.Husain.Hindu Dharma is a dust bin that anyone came and put his dirty mind.More we fill too much sad when those our people protect them on the base of freedom. In our group no one here who can see his mother nacked ? If some one here that impotent. -- a.. Visit your group "" on the web. b.. c.. -- <*> / <*> <*> Your Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 22, 2006 Report Share Posted April 22, 2006 protesting about Hussain's actions has nothing to do with being prude. That man is deliberatly targetting Hindus. Thats the bottom line. he does it so that he can get his 20 houris or whatever when he goes up. Llundrub <llundrub (AT) cox (DOT) net> wrote: As usual, we have people who equate being prude with being moral... - vapatel (AT) omifco (DOT) com Saturday, April 22, 2006 9:19 AM Re: Putting Clothes on a Goddess I do not aree for inocence of M.F.Husain.Hindu Dharma is a dust bin that anyone came and put his dirty mind.More we fill too much sad when those our people protect them on the base of freedom. In our group no one here who can see his mother nacked ? If some one here that impotent. -- a.. Visit your group "" on the web. b.. c.. -- Visit your group "" on the web. Talk is cheap. Use Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min. <*> / <*> <*> Your Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 23, 2006 Report Share Posted April 23, 2006 yes, but the artist and the art are two different things, and I might not even like the one but like the other anyway. But actually I haven't seen it. Nonetheless, the Mother as mirrored in earthly women is itself inspiration enough. And one cannot offend the progenatrix of all. - sankara menon Saturday, April 22, 2006 3:52 PM Re: Putting Clothes on a Goddess protesting about Hussain's actions has nothing to do with being prude. That man is deliberatly targetting Hindus. Thats the bottom line. he does it so that he can get his 20 houris or whatever when he goes up. Llundrub <llundrub (AT) cox (DOT) net> wrote: As usual, we have people who equate being prude with being moral... <*> / <*> <*> Your Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 23, 2006 Report Share Posted April 23, 2006 *Om Namah Sivaya all* ** *Humble pranams.* ** *All morals are for the mortals. * ** *Once one realizes the Self( One who is like Sri Sankaracharya), the Formless, Effulgent and Pure Intelligence and Immortal, immorality becomes immaterial.* ** *Again repeat all moralities are for the mortals who are subjected to the severe chains of repeated births and deaths.* On 4/22/06, Devi Bhakta <devi_bhakta > wrote: > > MUMBAI (Saturday, April 22, 2006): Adi Shankarachrya said: "God, I > have sinned trying to put clothes on you." And there are 900 > complaints against [91-year-old Indian artist M.F.] Husain who > innocently chose not to put clothes on the painting of a Goddess. > > Adi Shankaracharya, who propounded the Advita philosophy, > said: "God, I have sinned trying to put clothes on you; I have > sinned giving form to one who has no form." > > And there are 900 complaints against him — an artist — who chose not > to put clothes on a God or a Goddess. They are accusing him of not > putting clothes on a Goddess — the formless one. > > What Husain does is modern art - with nowhere forms. Even if he puts > clothes on someone, that person may look stark naked. It could be an > unseen reality, a figment of the imagination. And above all — > innocence. > > Why are they after Husain's blood? A cartoon in a Danish paper was > objectionable. The artist who made it wanted to insult the prophet, > show his face as resembling a terrorist. There was a clear motive > there - an effort to hurt, an effort to ridicule Islam. > > And there are some who produce toilet paper with the image of God, > Rama embossed on it or show Durga on whisky posters. > > But when Husain paints Goddess Lakshmi or Saraswati, he has no such > objectionable motive. He has not the slightest intention to be > disrespectful. Like Adi Shankaracharya, he is not happy about > putting man-made appeal on them. Perhaps that is why he is painting > them nude. > > That's it, the important thing is the motive. > > Three top artists of our country are Muslims — Husain, Raza and Tyeb > Mehta. I know the first two — Husain and Raza - very well. Both of > them are interested in Hinduism - not so much perhaps the rituals - > but its philosophy and mystery. Raza's Bindu series, which stunned > the world and got him great acclaim would never have emerged if he > was not deeply interested in the accumulated, universal, cosmic > knowledge of Hindu thinkers down the ages. > > And then Tyeb Mehta is painting Kali, the terrible Goddess and it > would not have attracted global attention if he did not have a brush > with the Hindu philosophy. > > None of these artists would ever dream of desecrating other > religious and intentionally hurting anyone. > > As for nudity, India has an unabashed leader record. Go and see > what's on the walls of temples and important monuments. And at > Kajuraho, Gods, Goddesses, apsaras and others are not only nude, but > are engaged in sensuous poses. The sculptors who have done these > immortal works are not insulting Gods and Goddesses. Actually, it is > claimed, reveal a spiritual scenario. The sculptors of the past were > not inhabited and they were free to express themselves. Their > revelations, their exposures do not amount to even one per cent of > nudity in Husain's works. > > In India, there is a bold, uninhibited approach to nudity. We do not > see it as physical. For instance, there is nothing physical about > the phallus we worship - Shiv lingam. It is perhaps the thought > behind it, the mystery and wonder that we see in it. And there is > the divine Mahavira who stands tall atop rocks who is worshipped by > millions of people belonging to all religions. > > It is all the same kind of innocence which is there in Husain's > paintings. > > - A.R.Kanangi > > > *-- > Lokah Samasthah Sukhino Bhavanthu > Aum Namah Sivaya > > Sripada Sevayam > sridhar* ------------------------ Sponsor --------------------~--> Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click./lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/XUWolB/TM --~-> <*> / <*> <*> Your Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 23, 2006 Report Share Posted April 23, 2006 HARI OM. This may be true in the RIDICULOUS formless MAYAVADA PHILOSOPHY world of unreality and subjectivity (since we are all God, we are also the clothes as well!). But, as we are not GOD, and in REALITY still live in human form on BHU LOKA; and are subjected to all the travails of human frailties, we are always subjected to dualties and need moral guidelines in this AGE OF KALI. This is not a human frailty, and those that are not realized mahatmas shouldnt go about trying to spout what they believe to be ADVAITIC philosophy of being above morals and such. One should always recognize this and not be deluded and mislead into thinking otherwise. Thus, there is nothing wrong in recognizing Hussain and his work for what it is: A SO CALLED PSUEDO SECULAR MOHAMMADEN WITH ANTI HINDU BAGGAGE TRYING TO COVER IT UP UNDER THE GUISE OF ARTISTIC ENDEAVOR. My .02 cents, JANARDANA DASA ammassridhar <ammassridhar > wrote: *Om Namah Sivaya all* ** *Humble pranams.* ** *All morals are for the mortals. * ** *Once one realizes the Self( One who is like Sri Sankaracharya), the Formless, Effulgent and Pure Intelligence and Immortal, immorality becomes immaterial.* ** *Again repeat all moralities are for the mortals who are subjected to the severe chains of repeated births and deaths.* On 4/22/06, Devi Bhakta wrote: > > MUMBAI (Saturday, April 22, 2006): Adi Shankarachrya said: "God, I > have sinned trying to put clothes on you." And there are 900 > complaints against [91-year-old Indian artist M.F.] Husain who > innocently chose not to put clothes on the painting of a Goddess. > > Adi Shankaracharya, who propounded the Advita philosophy, > said: "God, I have sinned trying to put clothes on you; I have > sinned giving form to one who has no form." > > And there are 900 complaints against him — an artist — who chose not > to put clothes on a God or a Goddess. They are accusing him of not > putting clothes on a Goddess — the formless one. > > What Husain does is modern art - with nowhere forms. Even if he puts > clothes on someone, that person may look stark naked. It could be an > unseen reality, a figment of the imagination. And above all — > innocence. > > Why are they after Husain's blood? A cartoon in a Danish paper was > objectionable. The artist who made it wanted to insult the prophet, > show his face as resembling a terrorist. There was a clear motive > there - an effort to hurt, an effort to ridicule Islam. > > And there are some who produce toilet paper with the image of God, > Rama embossed on it or show Durga on whisky posters. > > But when Husain paints Goddess Lakshmi or Saraswati, he has no such > objectionable motive. He has not the slightest intention to be > disrespectful. Like Adi Shankaracharya, he is not happy about > putting man-made appeal on them. Perhaps that is why he is painting > them nude. > > That's it, the important thing is the motive. > > Three top artists of our country are Muslims — Husain, Raza and Tyeb > Mehta. I know the first two — Husain and Raza - very well. Both of > them are interested in Hinduism - not so much perhaps the rituals - > but its philosophy and mystery. Raza's Bindu series, which stunned > the world and got him great acclaim would never have emerged if he > was not deeply interested in the accumulated, universal, cosmic > knowledge of Hindu thinkers down the ages. > > And then Tyeb Mehta is painting Kali, the terrible Goddess and it > would not have attracted global attention if he did not have a brush > with the Hindu philosophy. > > None of these artists would ever dream of desecrating other > religious and intentionally hurting anyone. > > As for nudity, India has an unabashed leader record. Go and see > what's on the walls of temples and important monuments. And at > Kajuraho, Gods, Goddesses, apsaras and others are not only nude, but > are engaged in sensuous poses. The sculptors who have done these > immortal works are not insulting Gods and Goddesses. Actually, it is > claimed, reveal a spiritual scenario. The sculptors of the past were > not inhabited and they were free to express themselves. Their > revelations, their exposures do not amount to even one per cent of > nudity in Husain's works. > > In India, there is a bold, uninhibited approach to nudity. We do not > see it as physical. For instance, there is nothing physical about > the phallus we worship - Shiv lingam. It is perhaps the thought > behind it, the mystery and wonder that we see in it. And there is > the divine Mahavira who stands tall atop rocks who is worshipped by > millions of people belonging to all religions. > > It is all the same kind of innocence which is there in Husain's > paintings. > > - A.R.Kanangi > > > *-- > Lokah Samasthah Sukhino Bhavanthu > Aum Namah Sivaya > > Sripada Sevayam > sridhar* Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less. ------------------------ Sponsor --------------------~--> Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click./lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/XUWolB/TM --~-> <*> / <*> <*> Your Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.