Shivaji book is making headlines these days. Book which was banned by state government and ban which was uplifted by supreme  court has made Maharashtra government see red in the verdict.

It is not ordinary book , it has name of one of most cherished icon of India and maharahstra , shivaji himself. The book which has title Shivaji: Hindu King in Islamic India .

Now I haven’t read the book and so cannot comment of the book but surely can convey my opinion on the concept of banning.

Banning concept is applicable to all the countries in the world but is seen more in old civilizations , middle east , Indian subcontinent and of course countries were democracy does not exist.

Before this shivaji book made news , sonia gandhi book made headlines where congress spokes person , manu singhvi went out the way to threaten author of going to the court.

Another book which was banned in gujarat (later court over ruled the ban) was jinnah book by jaswant singh. The book saw jaswant being out of BJP before being taken back.

Jinnah is favorite figure for congress and BJP for bashing. Considered to be single handily responsible for division of India and creating two countries out of one which again got divided into three countries. Pakistan was created out of India and later Pakistan got divided into Pakistan and Bangladesh.

Now what jaswant wrote in the book was jinnah as a person and equally blamed nehru for partition. Congress can be arrogant at times (as we see them recently) and being open to point of whether congress too was responsible for partition is no entry zone in India , much like pakistan , where idea that jinnah might have been wrong in creating pakistan . In pakistan congress is to be blamed for partition while in India it is jinnah. Truth can lie in between , isn’t it? and jinnah as well as nehru were humans and so was Mahatma gandhi.

Never the less , there is price of praising jinnah in India and jaswant singh learnt that in hard way.

It is not just political figures or historical icons , dhirubhai ambani biography called polyester king was also banned. Similarly many books on religions or fiction with religion has seen the ban.

It is not just books but movies too have been banned every now and then. Aandhi was banned during Indira Gandhi term while ban was lifted as soon as janta party came to power. Not only they got ban lifted but also made it shown on doordarshan. But did it help janta party?. Well Indira stormed back to power.

The logic behind bans is to make sure that the ideas in book , movie doesnot flow to people. Fear of people indulging in violence due to its effect or people getting swept by the idea or false information getting rooted in human brain are reasons behind bans.

But owning to bans and governments (all across the world) , especially in Indian subcontinent have directed how humans perceive things. If in India , jinnah has to be bad boy who is power hungry , in Pakistan ‘muslims ruled for thousand years’ even though it is not backed by history.

For e.g. how many people in pakistan know that Gupta dynasty is golden age of India which extended to almost entire subcontinent ?. How many Indians know about qasim?. How many Indians know that same jinnah hailed mahatma’s work in south africa or was hailed for hindu-muslim unity and took stand against khilafat movement?

The ban which does-not make sense on religious ground is banning books which are said to be defamatory for religion or religious figures or religion founders. Why it does not make sense on religious grounds ?. Well religion claims to be divine and so if it is divine ,no matter how many books are written which defame religion founders or god or gods , religion would keep thriving and as per religious beliefs people defaming would be judged for their conduct. Now why should there be ban on it.Let people write what they want to , if one beliefs in god , judgment is god’s domain. Isn’t it?. But unfortunately it doesnot work like that. Humans dont wait for god to judge and take action , they themselves come on streets and bash the author/pronounce threats or destroy public property. Indirectly they themselves become god (by judging, implementing judgment).

Coming to concept of ban , ban indirectly means people are too immature to debate , take different view points. Rejecting view points is personal right but bashing or killing or destroying things is uncivilized way of being. As Ram guha puts ‘ if one doesnot like book , he/she must not read it or better way is to write another book countering it , but banning is not right thing to do’.

It doesnot just apply to this book on shivaji or sonia gandhi or satanic verses. It applies to all book. Why stop an view point  , an idea?. If people are immature then why do they have right to vote?. If they can elect government , if they can know how to run their families , if they can reason things , then why can’t they decide which book to read or not to read?. Why do we need governments or mullahs or pandits or communities to decide which book is worth reading and which worth a skip?

Share on Facebook