It was the writer that died and not the man, but it was the man who posted the news of the writer's death in January, 2015: "Author Perumal Murugan has died. He is no God, so he is not going to resurrect himself."
Last week, however, the writer was resurrected by the historic judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice of the Madras High Court, Shri Sanjay Kishan Kaul, and Justice Mrs. Pushpa Sathyanarayana. After sifting through the facts of the case, after reading
Madhorubagan, the book in question (in the original Tamil and in its evocative English translation,
One Part Woman), the judges concluded their judgment with these unforgettable words: "The author, Prof. Perumal Murugan should not be under fear. He should be able to write and advance the canvass of his writings...The answer cannot be that it was his own decision to call himself dead as a writer. It was not a free decision, but a result of a situation which was created...We conclude by observing this "Let the author be resurrected to do what he is best at. Write."
One Part Woman tells the story of a young couple in a Tamil Nadu village who share a deep and tender love for each other. Their lives, however, are blighted by the fact that even after five years of marriage, they do not have a child. Ponna, the wife, has to undergo slights and humiliation while Kali, the husband, has to listen to taunts from his friends. After their prayers, sacrifices and arduous pilgrimages all go unanswered, they are advised by none other than both their mothers to send Ponna to the 14th day of the temple fair of the presiding deity of the area - Madhorubagan, the fusion of Shiva and Parvati - when childless women consort with unknown, young men in order to bear a child.
It is the description of this custom that was objected to by a group of people in the area who were able to convince the district administration that if Perumal did not abjectly apologise and withdraw his book from the public domain, dire consequences would follow.
The judgment cites many examples of the practice of
niyog from ancient times to the modern era and bolsters its defence of Murugan's work by giving examples from different parts of the country and various books and manuscripts that are similar to the beliefs and practices surrounding the temple fair that he has described. The judges correctly emphasize the point that Murugan's is a work of fiction that revolves around the loving relationship of a childless couple, the weight of guilt and fear that a childless Indian woman is forced to bear, and the extent to which such a woman can go in her desperate bid to bear a child. It is ironic that those who engaged in reviling Murugan and his book in the name of Hinduism completely ignored the extent to which
niyog is said to have been practiced in ancient India. None other than the founder of the Hindu Mahasabha and the first propounder of Hindutva, Savarkar, has written appreciatively that "Pandu (in the Mahabharata) allowed his wives to raise issue by resorting to the
Niyog system and they, having solicited the love of men of unknown castes, gave birth to the heroes of our great epic." It is not just that the modern day defenders of Hindutva who accused Murugan of 'defaming' their religion are ignorant of these things. Their motivation seems to spring from something other than defence of their religious beliefs.
The judgment not only defends the rights of Murugan but of all writers, artists and citizens to freedom of expression at a time when this seems to be under grave threat, it also makes extremely valuable comments on two very important issues.
The first concerns the nature of the protests against the book. The judges make the point that the book in question was published in 2010 in Tamil and not only received many state, national and international awards, but was also widely read. In 2014, it was translated into English and received great acclaim. But protests against the book broke out only at the end of 2014. A group of people distributed thousands of copies of a booklet that they printed, containing excerpts from the book that dealt with the temple festival and the 'immoral couplings' that were alleged to take place. It highlighted erotic passages and contained vitriolic comments on the obscene and anti-Hindu nature of the book.
Perumal Murugan had quit writing and withdrawn all his previous works in the face of protests against his latest book, Madhoroobagan
The protestors also distributed leaflets against the book on a large scale and organized demonstrations during which effigies of Murugan were burnt after being beaten with slippers. The only known group involved in this activity was the Hindu Munnani (a part of the Hindutva Brigade). The others were local traders, lorry-owners etc. The Hindu Munnani also went on to file the criminal case against Murugan and his publishers which was decided by the Madras High Court last week. The judges are constrained to say in Para 155 of the judgment "The incident, (of protest) if examined, can be said to be an orchestrated and stage-managed one, by a small group of people. The dates and events suggest it to be so."
Reasons for this come to mind quite readily. The victory of the BJP in the Lok Sabha elections of 2014 encouraged Hindutva groups to become increasingly aggressive in their attempts to mobilize large sections of people against what they described as insults to Hindu religion and beliefs. The earlier pulping of Wendy Doniger's book, the killings of rationalists like Pansare and Dabholkar were followed by the killing of Prof. Kalburgi in this period. Many writers and artists who protested against these acts were castigated as being "anti-Hindu communists". These very epithets were also used against Perumal Murugan. All this cannot but give credence to the belief that the attacks on him and his book are part of the larger attack on rational thinking, creative expression and scholarly debate that is becoming more strident and violent every day. The motivation behind this attack is not a religious but a political one that seeks to replace diversity and inclusiveness with stifling mediocrity; democratic norms and critiques of inequality with justifications of hierarchy and exclusion; and struggles against injustice with divisive polarization.
The second important issue that the Hon'ble judges apply their mind to at some length is what the role of the state should be when the right to freedom of expression of a citizen or citizens is threatened by individuals or groups or organizations who not only insist that their feelings or deeply-held beliefs have been wounded, but also threaten violence to ensure that these are assuaged. In para 180 of the judgment, they opine that "In the matter at hand, the author faced a challenge from the mob...coupled with the pressures of a
bandh and a strike in the town, called for by these elements. In such simmering circumstances, it was the bounden duty of the State Government to ensure that the law and order situation does not go out of hand, but that is not be achieved by placating anyone who seeks to take the law and order in his own hand at the cost of the person who has peacefully expressed his/her view".
The judges then take note of certain suggestions put forward by Murugan's counsel to ensure that, in future, the state fulfils its responsibility to protect freedom of expression. These suggestions, in short, were that the state's responsibility to maintain law and order will not allow it to compel any artiste to withdraw from his/her stand and non-state players cannot be allowed to determine what is permissible and what is not; that the government should constitute an expert body to deal with such conflicts that concern works of creative literature and art; that the state must provide proper police protection where authors and artistes come under attack from a section of society and officials should be sensitized on dealing with conflicts over artistic and literary expressions. The judges, amazingly, have said towards the end of their judgment that these guidelines should be adhered to by the Tamil Nadu government and an expert body be constituted within three months of the judgment.
This extraordinary judgment needs to circulated and studied as widely as possible. It can provide illumination in what are increasingly dark times.
In conclusion, it must be said that both judges reveal themselves to be true lovers of literature. Perhaps this explains, to some extent, the extent to which their judgement is imbued with wisdom, humour, compassion, understanding and clarity.
(Subhashini Ali is former MP, former Member of the National Commission for Women and Vice President of the All India Democratic Women's Association.)Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this article are the personal opinions of the author. The facts and opinions appearing in the article do not reflect the views of NDTV and NDTV does not assume any responsibility or liability for the same.