The oldest known case of Blasphemy in the Indian sub-continent is the publication of Rangeela Rasool(1924), a satirical work which contained references to the colourful life of Prophet Mohammed. Apparently, this was in response to a pamphlet (Sita ka Chinala) that depicts Sita, the Hindu God Lord Ram’s wife as a prostitute. The publication of Rangeela Rasool was done anonymously, without reference to the author (Pandit Chamupati) or the publisher (Rajpal & sons). The publisher of the Rangeela Rasool, ended up being killed by a carpenter from Lahore. The aforesaid carpenter was punished with the death sentence, but his grave is worshipped by believers. Full length movies have been made in Pakistan, which depict him as a Ghazi (warrior of the faith)
The origins of blasphemy laws could be traced to one of the Ten commandments which exhorts that “Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain”. Blasphemy laws which were in the statutes of many western democracies have been abolished- some as late as in 2019. Free speech obviously trumps over the need to punish rants and other forms of active disrespect to Gods. In the early days, the very denial of existence of God entailed burning dis-believers at the stake. All established religions have unleashed a wave of violence, killings, maiming and burning of books. Some of the great libraries containing treasure trove of knowledge of ancient Alexandria, Constantinople and Nalanda were burned by the faithful. The burning of churches in Pakistan is said to be in retaliation to burning of Quran in Sweden. Is blasphemy law consistent with 21st century values?
Presently blasphemy laws exist mostly in the Middle East Asian and African nations. Countries like Singapore have it in their statutes only to prevent disruptions in their fine-tuned social order. Indian laws on blasphemy are said to have originated after the Rangeela Rasool case. While blasphemy and associated punishments originated in Christianity, they are embedded as laws in Islamic nations like Pakistan and enforced by enraged crowds. In the Indian state of Kerala, which has a substantial Muslim population, worrying incidents have taken place; like the hacking of limbs of a college professor for preparing a question paper (allegedly containing adverse references to Prophet Muhammed) and the enforced disappearance of Chekannur Maulvi, an Islamic cleric who, according to the establishment Islamists, was preaching a deviant form of Islam.
A right to blaspheme would be a good idea and it would be consistent with present day values. Some Scandinavian/European nations already have it. And that’s how a cartoon here or a Quran burning there raises the temperatures elsewhere and threaten to spoil international relations. In a country like India, where there is so much diversity and majoritarianism growing, penal provisions for blasphemy acts as a spark that could light large fires. Proselytization and conversion start with highlighting limitations or irrationality in rival religions. If every such speech or utterance is considered blasphemous enough to rouse crowd-rage, the whole thing could metamorphose into something beyond control. Qatar insisted that India apologise for the utterances about Prophet Muhammed by BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma in a TV show, while Qatar had, many years ago, given refuge to M F Hussain, after rabid Hindu crowds wanted his scalp for depicting Hindu Goddesses in the nude.
Would it not be a good idea to banish signs of religion from public spaces, like textbooks, offices, assemblies, rallies etc? Since such displays could create fissures in society, as it did in Nuh recently, it makes immense sense to do so. Anyone who takes up arms or indulges in violence in retribution could be sent to re-education camps, much like the ones in Xin jiang province in China, where according to western sources, at some point of time, at least one million citizens were incarcerated and taught to live as good citizens. Much as it would help national unity etc, it may not be practical since most political parties encash on religion as their vote bank.
