Holy Gita's Shree Krishna

Shiban Khaibri

It was Dr. Sarwapali Radhakrishnan, the noted philosopher, educationist and President of India who said that he knew only one Shree Krishna and He was Holy Gita's Shree Krishna. The Holy Gita - the divine treatise in the form of a discourse between Shree Krishna and His devotee Arjun is the greatest religious and philosophical dialogues known to man, with all solutions to the mysteries of life and death, ways of action, ways to supreme spirit, way of renunciation a nature and soul, distinction between divine and demoniac and what not.

It is, however, quite strange to note how Shree Krishna is generally sought to be known, depicted and described in media and in most of the cases, presented in an uncalled for and somewhat disrespectful way, only on the silver screen. Bal Leela (with emphasis on stealing of butter), Ras Leela (attempted to be generally shown as leading, inciting and participating in ladies' group dance),

Bankey (the one stealing the clothes of the bathing ladies), Erotically -projected lover (in deep love with Radha etc) are the so called popular facets of Shree Krishna, the incarnation of Vishnu which His so called devotees are either interested in or unable to go to describe or know Him beyond. Playing of Holi colours with depiction of cheap manoeuvrings; in cinemas, Dandi dance, "Mutki Todan" are other areas of how lackadaisically Shree Krishna is projected all about. Now please look at the other gory picture of the matter

 

"Radha kinv gori, main kyon kala?  "Radha ka dil kinv na jalley?”  “Bol Radha bol sangam hoga ki nahin” Radeh ki tu ne bansari churai and hundreds of similar so called devotional songs, written and sung, regarding Shree Radhey with double and meanings, sensuously laced derogatory in substance, are played not only on radio, TVs', in cinemas etc but in temples as well.

Likewise, dialogues in many movies delivered by actors and actresses are mixed with lampooned remarks and insulting gestures towards Shree Krishna and Shree Radhey. Not only here, even otherwise it is a habit rather an policy to project Hindu religion, traditions and rites in a disparaging manner and with mockery in most of the movies and many times on idiot box as well.

 A FEW QUOTES:- "Agar tum ney meri baat nahin mani, tou tujey gali key Ram Lal key sath raat ko soona padega (Paresh Rawal to Akshey Kumar in Hera Pheri) "Kaun whoh gali ka khoosat pansari? (Akshey). Paresh replies

 

Nahin Baba, Ram Lal yani Gali kaa Kutta. Could Kutta get no other name in Hera Pheri excepting Ram Lal? In another movie, Wafadar, actor Anupam Kher says, *Is kharab zamaney main Ram ka plan fail ho sakta hai, Rawan ka nahi."--"Sita ko Prasad ki tarah hadap kiya." An actress in this very movie says, "Chaloo bazaar sey Ram layen."In yet another movie, Apradhi actor Anil Kapur says, "Na main Krishan hoon, na voh Draupadi hai." In this movie, this Hindu actor is shown going home where he removes and throws out in pieces, the photo of goddess Durga and makes abusive postures towards Shiv Ling. In another movie, named Gudoo, actor Mukesh Khanna makes fun of Yagya, Pooja, Path, Shastra and even calls Charnamrat as murti ki dhovan "and calls Pujari as Brahmin Mushtanda while this Hindu actor's wife, in the movie, is shown busy and engrossed in Puja, he with abusive postures and insulting tones calls it as "Hathkanda". To Shree Krishna's murti, he is shown addressing, "I will lift you from Asan and throw you out Similarly in Ganga ki Saugandh, noted actor Amitabh Bachan says , "Pathar kin bejan murti " to a goddess revered and worshipped by Hindus. In this very movie, a Hindu priest is depicted in a very detestable form enjoying erotic dance, wine and a courtesan's amorous advances while simultaneously counting beads as against a Muslim character whose role is showna that of a pious soul in addition to (and and rightly so with due respects glorification of his faith. In another picture.

PROPAGATION OF FAITHS SHOULD, IN THE BURST OF ZEAL, NEVER BE MADE DEPENDENT ON THE SUPPORT OF CRITICISM OF THE TENETS OF OTHER FAITHS AND NEVER REMAIN IN AN AIR OF BELIEF THAT ONLY THEIR FAITH WAS SUPERB AND REAL.

actor Shakti Kapoor dressed partially like Shree Krishna, with "mukat" on head and a flute kissing his lips, approaches Qadir Khan, playing the character of a father of two daughters and says to him, "I...... am ....Kishan ...Kanahya....Karunga tumhari donun baitiyon se shadi aur karoonga ras leela......." Not only this, the delivery of this dialogue takes place along with a body language that amounts to ridicule and profanity towards of Shree Krishna. There are thousands of such heart rending instances making a mention of which, even in brief, shall take reams of paper and a lot of time.

The question is not whether idol worship is right and allowed by sacred Vedas, whether out of love and devotion seeing Shri Krishna in Ras, Bal Leela or in Holi is wrong but the whole exercise as above mentioned seems to be done to create an air of scepticism and irreverence or attach just a triviality around and most shockingly, done mostly by Hindus themselves against the sentiments of devout Hindus. When the rationale and the religious philosophy behind Shree Radhey is not known or sought to be known, why Shree Krishna and Shree Radhey are projected as ordinary lovers and kept in the same class as that of ordinary mortals like Heer Ranjha, Laila Majnoon, Sheeren Farhad et al? Cinemas in most of the cases have been wreaking havoc with the religious sentiments of devout Hindus when showing Shree Krishna or Shree Radhey as ordinary cheap lovers. It is equally true, however, that a few old movies have been showing regard and due respect and glorification of the Hindu religious Heads and thus respecting the sentiments of Hindus. There have been instances of many TV programs and debates where attempts have been made to ridicule the tenets of Hinduism or the philosophy of rituals applying the yardstick of westernism " crafty secularism or some unsolicited views of so called progressive minded personalities or what other religions and faiths hold, in comparison. In one of such TV programmes, there was a live debate whether "Punarjanam"(rebirth) is a reality . The concerned TV anchor who could barely speak even a line in correct Hindi, out-rightly lambasted Punarjanam and called it a myth and what not. This writer was deeply hurt and could not participate in the live debate as the phone line was busy but somehow it was conveyed to the channel that no power on this earth could challenge the writings in the Holy Gita where it is emphatically made clear that rebirth is a reality. Challenging or attempting to critically comment upon the Holy Gita tantamount to committing blasphemy. Why do not sucha overambitious TV channels have the cheeks and the courage to organize similar critical debates with respect to faiths and religions other than Hinduism? If attempted, they know the price they shall have to pay and how the pudding shall taste like, to them. Then why to always take liberties with Hinduism only, the ancient most religion of the world, the followers of which are taken for granted not to get offended for even blasphemous acts committed against their faith which is exploited to the hilt for various reasons including creating confusion in their ranks including even proselytizing. This is a very serious thing and needs to be pondered over. We believing in diversity and respect for all religions, have to oppose it non- violently. Religions are a matter of faith, held dear by the followers thereof and need to be respected by all. Most of the troubles and conflicts shall never see the light of the day, in fact, never take place, if people stop criticizing other faiths while delivering religious discourses and sermons.

We mortals cannot tamper with or meddle in matters of divinity. We cannot research religions with ulterior motives or otherwise such research shall be imperfect because imperfect we are researching things with senses. For example, we have to accept perfect k It knowledge which comes down, as is stated in the Holy Gita. Whatever Shree Krishna says, we, as devotee students have to accept, and accept everything and dare not contradict Him or His anything. We have to accept Bhagvad Gita without interpretation, addition or deletion and without our whimsical views, whether "rebirth" or other revelations made in this Holy book which Mahatma Gandhi was calling as his" spiritual Dictionary to be believed and accepted. Dr. S. Radhakrishnan was saddened on seeing or reading Shree Krishna being projected mostly as "Makhan Choor "partaker of Ras Leela or throwing gulal on Gopies etc: as he said he knew only one Shree Krishna of Holy Gita alone about which Shrimad Bhagavat( C10) says, wonderful is the teacher Shree Krishna, wonderful are His deeds, even the utterances of His Holy name sanctifies him who speaks and him who hears." Why not, He says, "I am the Father and the Mother of the world (Chapter 9, v 17). He wants His devotee to be alike to foe and friend, alike in honour and dishonour, alike in heat and cold, happiness and misery, to be free from attachment, alike in praise and criticism, to be reticent, satisfied, steady in mind, such a devotee is dear to me. "(Ch.12; v18/19) Shree Krishna takes all and full responsibility for the one who surrenders unto Him and He indemnifies such a person against all reactions of sins. (C18 V66). We all have to focus our attention with devotion, submissive spirit and strong belief, on what Shree Krishna is actually teaching us in the Holy Gita.

DISCLAIMER:

The views expressed in the Article above are Author’s personal views and kashmiribhatta.in is not in any way responsible for the opinions expressed in the above article.

Courtesy: The Martand- The Official organ of All State Kashmiri Pandit Conference: 31st August, 2009