Of the Sacred and the Profane: Hinduism and PK.

I am a practicing Hindu. I am also educated in English medium and have pursued

science as a matter of personal interest. I would like to think that I am a rational
human being plugged into the modern world. And finally I would like to think I
have a mind open enough to allow pertinent questions raised on my belief
systems, and strong enough to remain unperturbed on issues that try to dent my
convictions; convictions borne out of my own experience, understanding,
scholarship, openness and, I dare say, wisdom.
So, as I watched the latest Aamir Khan starrer PK, I distinctly remember feeling
consternation and indignation and at the same time dismay and disdain.
The world shall always ridicule the stupid. Why are you stupid? Why are you
weak? Why have you failed to build your faith on a solid bedrock of spiritual
insight and practice? People prefer magic to effort towards spiritual evolution
just as people prefer a lottery win to enterprise. Such people deserve to be
slapped about by all and sundry. Such, and other thoughts were gushing
through me. Expectedly, the fringe hue and cry is getting bigger, if not with
understanding of core issues, out of a herd mentality and an expression of
solidarity. Also, they hope to win through the power of numbers. But will that
really be a win?
There are archetypes and stereotypes. There are superheroes and the invincible.
There are caricatures and over-the-top villains. Funnily enough there are
stereotypes of every shade of gray in-between. And these are the tools that we
employ to tell stories and to convey messages. From Vyas to Buddha, from
Shakespeare to Bollywood, storytellers have employed these devices. So,
Shakespeare uses a Jew, and Bollywood has employed stereotypes of a
Madrasi, a Marwari moneylender, an evil Saas, and so many others.
But the storyteller also mesmerizes, and can hence skew public opinion in favour
of A or B as he wishes, or at least hopes to. Which is why, in the Aamir Khan
starrer Fanaa, attempts were made to make the audience empathize with a hardcore terrorist simply on the basis of his having a love-story with a young blind
girl who only wanted to get laid. This was achieved through an ample sprinkling
of romantic scenes and feel-good songs that the public laps up. At the end of the
movie, a majority of the audience was not interested in the broader message of
the movie, and yet the protagonist still remained a hero.
Let us admit it, Bollywood has a huge sway over the national consciousness. That
is the reason a few years ago when I came out of the theatres after watching the
very violent Ghaniji, another Aamir Khan starrer, I was scared! I was scared that
a) Criminals rule the roost and any ordinary citizen can become a victim at any
time, and b) unless a person survives by divine intervention from the attack and
then goes on to acquire superhuman abilities he can do nothing about the assault
and injustice and c) There is no rule of law. Imagine the effect of that movie on
the collective consciousness of the country. But, this is not about Aamir Khan.

Admittedly, there are two sides to this value argument: A) Movies in India do
affect the collective consciousness of people and hence play the part of a major
force for social evolution, and B) Movies are meant for entertainment; creative
expression, poetic license and humor convert many things into the acceptable,
and it is up to the wisdom of the audience to take what they want from it and
reject the rest.
So what is wrong with the movie PK? Well, for starters, it resorts to using a
simpleton alien with magical powers to deride - guess what? - simpleton faithfuls
being suckered by a most blatantly conning godman. Secondly, and perhaps
more importantly, it uses the most blatantly conning godman to deride peoples
matters of faith not just relating directly to the godman, but everything else
associated with the religious practices of a faith that the godman also seemingly
belongs to. This is important to put in perspective: the caricatured godman is not
being bashed here; he is only the tool. Symbolisms, pictures and images, idols,
anthropomorphic gods, feeding of cows, temple-going, placing faith on rustic
shrines, endowments, gurus, penances, rituals, nothing is spared. Again, let us be
clear: For the audience, the message that the godman is a fake and a con artist is
clear in the very first frame. Not even the most vulnerable superstitious would
have any doubts about that. For a large part of the rest of the movie it is all about
making everything associated with religious practices look farcical and
ridiculous through superficial observation, meaningless extrapolation and
carefully designed ploys. And all this is justified because the protagonist happens
to be a childlike alien and does not need to take a deeper look into the
epistemology, thoughts and feelings behind these practices. For some degree of
political correctness and also as a feeble defense of secularist agenda, some other
religions also get passing mention. However, and without a doubt the target
religion remains Hinduism.
It so happens, that a large portion of the population is not really religious. It
mostly happens to have a religion by virtue of being born into it. However, an
equally large portion of the population is perfectly happy to let religious
symbolism and practices remain sacred for the practitioners. It is this large,
perhaps agnostic population that this movie affects deeply. This it achieves by
showing the superstitious and faithful in bad light.
There have been, and are fake, miracle-vending, self-aggrandizing godmen in
India (and in the world, in all religions). There are also spiritual leaders and
teachers. There are Yoga and meditation preceptors. There are heads of religious
centres. There have been celebrated saintly reformers and spiritual beacons like
Swami Vivekanand and Maharshi Aurobindo. There are new-age gurus in all
hues from utterly pedantic to overtly elitist. There are also millions of ascetics,
monks seekers and seers who descend on the Kumbh mela from their retreats
every year. Sooner or later, the fake conmen have been exposed and ridiculed,
even reprimanded. Sooner or later, the stalwarts have been celebrated, studied
and followed. And more often than not, the renunciates have been left alone to
their devices. There exists a self-cleansing and balancing mechanism in society. A
movie like PK does nothing path breaking in this regard.

What it does achieve is attack the very foundations of religious practices from
outside, without so much as to get into rudimentary analysis, empathy, respect
or understanding. In this manner, it should not be surprising that it evokes
strong indignation in many quarters.
As a practicing Hindu I have educated myself enough to know some of the core
values and the associated practices. In the first place, it is not a religion in the
Abrahamic meaning of the term in that it has no single and final messenger of
God and no single book. It considers all paths valid, including meditation,
devotion, worship, service, knowledge, logic, rationalism, materialism,
spiritualism, atheism, agnosticism, polytheism, monotheism, paganism, dualism,
non-dualism, and so on. It does not conquer, proselytize or destroy native
cultures. It has its own approach to metaphysics, wisdom and aesthetic, and
valuable at that considering the rich heritage that it has gifted the world. It
considers the entire creation as a sacred expression of the supreme truth, and is
therefore very much in tune with modern concepts of environmental
conservation. Many of its esoteric and exoteric practices can be explained within
the realms of reason, or at least historicity. It can be as simple and superficial, or
as complex and deep, as a practitioner chooses based on his inclination. It can
evolve, it can reject, or it can add to itself organically.
As a person born and brought up in India, I am also aware that many Hindus are
mired in superstition, shallowness, bigotry, and hypocrisy; that practitioners
often seek miracles and use it for commercial, social and political benefit more
than for establishment of a personal spiritual connect. Much of the same can be
said about any religion, even in the modern times. However, this observation is
not made in defense, rather this is a proud admission that Hinduism can evolve
and so can its practitioners. Attacking and ridiculing the sacred is NOT one of the
valid ways to do so.