This article is about a very versatible and enigmatic photogenic icon of India, Maqbool Fida Husain (MFH). MFH is one of the founders of the Progressive Arts Group , formed on the eve of India' Independence. Inspired by Western Expressionism, the PAG aimed to create a new form of national aesthetic for India. Forbes magazine recently declared him the Picasso of India.
I recently came across a campaign to "punish" Husain for his "blasphemous" painting which apparently "denigrates" Hinduism. The website for the campaign is Sanatan.org. Among many other things, the website claims that the paintings depict Hindu Gods and Goddesses in nude forms, bestiality and crosses all limits of decency. One of the Sanatan.org readers has even pledged a reward of Indian Rs. 100,001.00 to anyone who "teaches Mr. Husain a lesson".
After doing a bit of background check on this issue, I hope to express my take on the matter here. First and foremost, the painting captions on the website are taken from another book titled Anti Hindus by Prafull Goradia. They are not the original M. F. Husain captions and are there only to mislead people and channelizing their emotions so as to reach the conclusion which Sanatan wants. You can read many of Prafull's articles here and form your own opinion about him.
Source: Artswithoutborders.com. Title: Sita Rescued
If there is anything called perversion, it is the interpretation of Husain's paintings by Prafull, who even goes to the extent of interpreting the above painting titled "Sita Rescued" by MFH to be a depiction of Sita masturbating on the long tail of hanuman. Indeed, pornography lies in the eyes of the beholder! Looks like Prafull is one of the few lucky guys in the evolution chain on planet earth who need not spend a penny on pornography. He can see one in every image.
"Sita Rescued" most probably represents a scene from Valmiki's Ramayana in the Sundara-Kanda chapter. Here is Sandeep Dougal's version:
the image it conjures up in my mind is the scene in the Sundara-Kanda of Valmiki's Ramayana, where Hanuman after tracing Sita in Ashoka grove of Ravana's Lanka, suggests to her: (all quotes from the Ramayana of Valmiki, trans. P.Lal)
"Climb on my back, devi, and I will take you back to Rama. I will fly over the ocean. No one in Lanka will dare pursue us."
And Sita says:
"I now see that you are indeed capable of carrying me away from here. But I must think of the consequences. I do not think that it is right that I should go with you. Supposing your wind-swift speed makes me giddy and I tumble off your back into the shark-and-crocodile-infested sea? I cannot go with you. You will be in danger. The rakshasas will rally and attack you, and when you engage in combat with them, what will happen to me? What will I do?"
Now, is it not possible to view this painting under question as an apt illustration for this incident? Couldn't Sita be clutching onto the tail out of sheer, to use her words, giddiness?
Second point is that the picture description offered by Sanatan is taken from another group called the Sanskar Bharti. This is a group based in India which has in the past worked closely with other radical groups like Sangh Parivar, VHP which has in the past protested (sometimes violently) the celebration of Valentine's Day, shooting of Deepa Mehta's film "Water", ransacked beauty pageants, stoned theatres screening "Fire". In all these cases, it has acted as a "moral police" to protect Indian culture. In one case, the VHP even destroyed an exhibition on Ayodhya as it depicted the Jain "Dasharatha Jataka" verion in which Rama and Sita are siblings. The painting description which Sanatan gives are all what Sanskar Bharti offered them.
Both the above points makes me wonder what the true intentions of Sanatan are. My personal take is that Sanatan is just yet another mouthpiece for those who think that India is a Hindu Rashtra and not a plural secular democracy. Husain adopted the entire spectrum of vast Indian material (Hindu, Muslim, Jain, Tribal, Provincial). His works with Hindu materials proved him a Muslim who could transform art into this plural category, Indian. Refusal of Husain is a refusal of the secular project which underlies the very fabric of India.
The following is a MFH painting.
Source: Asianart.com. Title: Hanuman V
The picture description for "Hanuman V" at Sanatan.org is
"Lord Hanuman with His genitals pointing towards a woman The title of the painting is Hanuman - V. It is done in water colour on paper. It shows a three faced Hanuman, and a nude couple (male & female). The identity of the woman is not in doubt. The erect genital of Hanuman is bent in the direction of the female. The obscenity is too obvious. Would it not injure the feelings of Hindus ?"
Really ? Is the "obscenity" so obvious ? I dont think so. The inspiration for this Hanuman paiting by MFH is well described below (Note its similarity with Nikos Kazantzakis' theme on the eternal struggle between flesh and spirit):
"In the "Hanuman" series we encounter this selfless servant of Rama and Sita in a new light. Selflessness may be a noble virtue, but it is achieved at great cost to one's person. In a particularly moving picture, Husain fills the entire canvas with the figure of Hanuman. He is seen sitting in a meditative position, attempting to train his noble mind on distant, impersonal and spiritual thoughts appropriate for contemplation. Husain appears to stress the point, made by several Indian philosophies, that action is not incompatible with contemplation--rather, they complement each other. While the brave and valiant Hanuman tries to concentrate on his meditation, the naked figures of Rama and Sita can be seen in the foreground. Although they occupy only a small space in the painting, they are painted in deep hues and drawn with much sensual detail that show the male figure eagerly pursuing the female. The self-absorbed couple play out their happy role in the presence of Hanuman, whose devotion and loyalty makes him entirely "invisible" to them. But Hanuman does see, although his mind wrestles against the feelings generated by the erotic scene. Husain's Hanuman is affected by desire, by the sexual carryings on of the semi-divine lovers before him. Does he cast a desiring eye on Sita? Husain portrays exceedingly well the struggle Hanuman undergoes as he strains to look beyond the immediate surrounding and into an impossibly distant other place. The noble servant tries not to be moved by the scene in front of him in which a private act is performed before him as if he did not exist. The desire provoked in him is unlawful, and to look at the this scene of lovemaking is forbidden to him; he must, eunuch-like, behave as if he is not touched by it. His meditation is hampered, but it is the meditative mind that he most needs in order to calm his strong and confused feelings. The energetic and youthful servant has suddenly grown old, his face is tight and drawn, his whiskers have turned white. "
Source: Asianart.com.
Compare the two paragraphs and conclude for yourselves who the "pervert" is, Sanatan.org or Husain. If Sanatan.org is to be taken seriously, we will have to burn our Puranas, Ramayana, Mahabharata, Gita Govinda, Kalidasa etc. All of these texts have various forms of imageries and stories with sexual themes, both in the context of "normal" human beings and between Gods.
in Painting only "Hindu Gods" in naked form. 
