|
||||||||||
|
|
Homosexuality
in Urdu poetry: Tolerance in medieval India and Islamic societies in the past Friday, July 03, 2009 For once, the Shankaracharya and the Shahi Imam are
on the same side as also the BJP and the Muslim leaders. They are all opposed
to the court's decision terming consenting homosexual relationship among adults
as 'no longer criminal'. Barely a handful of MPs have openly hailed the
verdict. But it's interesting how tolerant earlier societies were to
homosexuality. Even in Islamic societies from Iran to India, the Ulema and the
common folk were quite understanding of the such relationships. Gar aan turk sheerazi be-dast aarad dil-e-maara ba khaal hindosh bakhsham samarqand o bukhara ra
[Hafiz] Translation: If that Turk lad listens to my heart's cry,
I can forsake the cities of Samarqand and Bukhara against the black mole on his
face. Poets like Hafez and the great Mir Taqi Mir openly
wrote about their homosexuality. The divans of Urdu poets of 18th and 19th
century are full of couplets that would outrage even some of today's
'self-styled liberals', but in those days even the orthodox Ulema were either
lenient or indifferent. They were ready to accept that everybody need not
necessarily be like us and society should not impose its views on everyone. In
present scenerio, it seems strange as an intellectual like Mushirul Hasan
avoids commenting on the decision, for fear of enraging others. Eminent religious scholars were less judgmental then
and often took umbrage behind the extensive legal case including the
requirement of witnesses that are needed to hold someone guilty of unnatural
acts as per Shariah. Either it was medieval homosexuality that is evident
in couplets from the era of Aarzoo and Mir Soz or the pederasty in Firaq's
shaayri and Josh's memoirs, the tolerant society openly accepted it. However,
today it is unthinkable. Contemporary Urdu poetry has just one openly gay
poet Iftikhar Nasim 'Ifti'. However, in the past it was not considered
outrageous. Poets openly wrote about their relationships. Turk bachche se ishq kiyaa thaa rekhte kya kya
maiNne kahe rafta rafta Hindustaan se sher meraa Iran gayaa[Mir
Taqi Mir] Above I quoted a coulet of the legendary Persian
poet Hafiz. It was no different in India. Mir Taqi Mir celebrated his
relationship: Mir kyaa saade haiN biimar hue jiske sabab usii attaar ke launDay se davaa lete haiN Or Us Mughal-zaade se nibhii har baat kii takraar khuub bad-zabaanii kii bhii usne, to kahaa bisyaar khuub His divan is full of such references, often termed
as 'ibtizaal' [literary decadence] and deleted from concise collection of his
poetry. Like poets of that era, Mir had homosexual relationships with boys and
later got married also, as per the tradition of the times. But he never faced any opposition then. There was no
disapproval from the Ulema then. Were they less religious or less cultured?
Certainly not. But they did respect every person's right to lead his life as
per his wishes. Or at least leave them to their own ways rather than
worrying about what they do in their bedrooms. I feel if a person is truly
religious or spiritual he would be more compassionate and would avoid finding
faults with others. In Urdu ghazal, the gender of the beloved is often
not clear. However, there are hundreds of couplets in divans of the classical
poets where the lover is clearly a male or a boy. The great poet Khwaja Haider Ali Aatish wrote: Zuleikha ko dikhaaye aasmaaN tasviir Yusuf kii Ye dil diivana hai jiskaa pari-paikar hai voh laRkaa Mir Soz said: Hai chaal qayaamat, hai husn ya sharaara chaltaa hai kis adaa se Tuk, dekho Khudara and Aarzoo wrote: fareb-e-khush pisraaN khurdan Aarzoo rasm ast za-rooe tajruba guft eeN chuniiN pidar maaraa One of the greatest poets of the sub-continent, Mir
Taqi Mir, who is termed Khuda-i-Sukhan, wrote numerous couplets celebrating gay
relationships. In fact, so explicit is Mir, that one may think twice before
quoting them. Not more than a fraction of their poetry is explicit
or obscene. In fact, a majority of the asha'ar treats the subject subtly and
with sensuousness like the following couplet of a gahzal where the usage 'kya
kya kuchh' is unusual and fresh. The poet yearning for his beloved dreams of
the pleasures of sexual union. wasl uskaa Khudaa nasiib kare meraa dil chaahtaa hai kya kya kuchh In these couplets Mir falls sick owing to his
excessive longing for his beloved boy [yaani maiN shauq kii ifraat se biimaar
huaa] and Mus'hafi describes the feelings in terms of waves [lahroN se saara
daryaa aaGhosh kar diyaa]. The legendary Urdu scholar SR Faruqi terms some of
them as 'international literary gems' and extraordinary couplets. It is
noteworthy that Faruqi doesn't even use words like 'good' and 'fine'
generously. The recent court verdict has 'shocked' a large
number of clerics and even litteratuers. The Victorian law that criminalised
not just gay relationships but also any other form of sexual activity [even any
other sexual position among man and woman except missionary posiion] other than
the order of Nature, has just been reinterpreted by the Delhi High court. Even today in sub-continent, many homosexuals
succumb to family pressure and marry, thereby destroying the life of a woman
also. Pakistan-born Iftikhar Nasim has been brutally honest about his life and
the difficulties he faces when he decided to 'come out' rather than living a
'false life'. Read selected couplets of Iftikhar Nasim here. Read his famous poem Mere Baba. In this verse the
poet seeks answers for his alternate sexuality in Urdu, Hindi and Roman scripts
here. Posted by indscribe at 12:27 PM Labels: Urdu poetry 16 comments: Anonymous said... Again you are showing an unhealthy obsession with
the BJP. For your information Shaina NC of the BJP has whole
heartedly welcomed the decriminalization of homosexuality. Nirmala Sitharaman
of the BJP also came out in support. Fact is that except for the Left every party is
cautious. If you want you can say VHP is totally against the
judgment along with other religious bodies amongst Muslims and Christians. Why drag BJP into this? 03 July, 2009 19:18
Pinku said... Bhai, thanks for sharing the poetry and the post. couldn't help wondering if you will ever have a
greater lover than anonymous? He seems to be there the moment you put up a post. 04 July, 2009 00:54
nimis540 said... Interesting post..Never knew that people ,on a
religious outlook,were tolerant towards homosexuality. Whatever,I am least bothered about others sexual
preferences as long as they confine it within their own personal space.. 04 July, 2009 04:15
Shafiq said... Not only in Iran and India, but also in the Arab
world. I don't understand why the Muslim MPs have come out against this - in a
secular democracy, it's only right for people to be able to live their private
lives the way they see fit. 04 July, 2009 08:48
Arshad said... The whole aricle looks out of place.Homosexuality
can not be justified if a muslim poet's poetry has glimpse of it or even he
excercised that. There might have been the individual cases of homosexual, gay
, lesbian in society just like we have/had rapist,alcohalist, criminals
etc.that does not mean it was not opposed by then Ulemas or legalised/
recognised by community at large. Injuction of Islamic law would be made only
on the basis of Quran and Sunnah, which declares homosexuality as a grave
sin.So please dont try to fool yourself nor to sow the seeds of
confusion/uncertainity in the minds of muslim's mindm who knows less Islam. 05 July, 2009 10:08
How do we know said... Its not just the Iran and Urdu shayars. Trust me,
most Indians couldnt care less about who you marry, so long as it doesnt lead
to a traffic jam. My theory is that this whole homophobia is a direct
import from the West. 05 July, 2009 12:03
indscribe said... This post has been removed by the author. 06 July, 2009 00:41
indscribe said... Anon @ Good to see you back but I wish you revealed
your identity. Pinku, Nimi, Shafiq, HDWK thanks for your comments Arshad @ The court has de-criminalised the act, not
legalised it, There is a thin difference and this is very important why it is
needed to de-criminalise any act other than the missionary ordained sexual
activity. It is not a crime, though it may be immoral like
many other things are to you and me. Morality differs from person to person. And as far as Islamic point of view is concerned, I
think Allah is the best judge. Even otherwise Islam doesn't have a concept of
institutionalised clergy, though it looks otherwise these days. Half-a-dozen openly homosexual kings ruled in India
alone (from Delhi) in the 850 years after Sultan Mahmood and none of the great
clergymen had the courage to stop them or declare such acts illegal then. Even
their names were read in 'khutba'. The fact is that what someone does in his or her
private life, should be between him/her and his/her God. We don't have the
right to judge that. If an adult person insists on doing it, he should have
every right to do it--even if it means 'destructing himself'. At least, a homosexual declaring himself a
homosexual is much better than a guy who marries for the sake of society, ruins
the woman's life and still goes for such relations. We are a modern nation where there should be space
for every group including all sorts of minorities including the sexual ones. 06 July, 2009 00:45
Lucknowite said... May be the Islamic societies you referred were
tolerant, History has shown that darbari mullahs have gone up to any extent to
appease their masters, so if you are concluding that Islam is tolerant towards
Homosexuality you are wrong. The so called islamic societies are different than
Quranic societies and Quran condemns homosexuality. And the poets, with all due
respect to their talent, had openly flouted Islamic rules, alchohal, for
example was an integral part of their lives same goes true with kings. So
please don't confuse people, by giving impression that Islam keeps mum on these
evils, in your quest to pose moderate, reformist or liberal, the so called
politicized terms. 07 July, 2009 06:32
Anonymous said... Homosexuality is disorder. Yes, like other deasese
it should also be acceptable to society. 07 July, 2009 07:18
indscribe said... @ Lucknowite: I hope you have read the whole post
and comments. Firstly, it is not necessary that what is immoral in the eyes of
Islam may necessarily be criminalised in a secular country that is governed by
different laws. And I wonder the Muslim organisations who take out
morchas and rallies, issuing statements on homosexuality, do they ever realise
that there are much bigger issues in this country. Just the other day, I met a man who lost his
pregnant wife because he didn't have money. He was crying endlessly, not just
wife but the kid also died And that was just one of the six cases reported in
one hospital in a city in a single day. He didn't have money to pay bribe to
the 'midwives' in the hospital. This is happening across the country. It was
incidental that he was a Muslim. Such guys have no where to go. Middle-class
and rich go to private hospitals, leaving the poor to the mercy of ill-equipped
govt hospitals. I am amazed (in fact, sickened) by the apathetic
society (of which I am a part) that doesn't care about poor Indians whether
Hindus or Muslims at all, but feels important to hound the homosexuals. As far as Islam is concerned, I don't understand how
it clashes your or mine beliefs. We are free to consider homosexuality as a sin.
Ulema are free to express their opinion though if only we take out fatwas about
a century back issued by the eminent clergymen, you would be astonished. How harsh they were on issues like getting
photographed which was considered a shirk. 07 July, 2009 07:43
Lucknowite said... I understand that laws of secular countries are not
governed by one single ideology. However you must understand that it was not
Islam due to which homosexuality was considered unlawful so far by our secular
laws. Historically in majority of the countries which are not necessarily
Islamic, homosexuality was considered unlawful and called for punishment in
some or other way. Countries where it is legal has been made legal through
amendments later on. People will justify any act which they feel
satisfaction in. Ask a drug addict and he will tell you that there is no better
satisfaction in the world than a dose he enjoys. It does not mean that drug consumption
should be legalised or decriminallised if one is doing it for the sake of
satisfaction without harming anyone else. You may say that drug kills
eventually and leaves negative effects. So similar deductions hold good for
homosexuality. Despite the opinion being divided, many experts will tell the
ill effects of homosexuality and treat it as disorder. So what is wise; being
cautious or freely engage in such activity? Till it is proven completely
harmless. Another point is that people become homosexual due
to environmental factors especially during their puberty or due to their sexual
fantasies. However in their subconcoious mind they also like to have a partner
who resembles the opposite sex. That is why the poets you mentioned, have
imagined the physique of their beloved with feminine traits and fantacised
about them. Thirdly if homosexuals can have the right to march
on the streets in support of it why can't those who oppose it have the right to
say so? that too in a democratic country and in a democratic way. Moreover you
are mixing issues, How can opposing homosexuality deter someone to do other
good deeds? If someone lost his life due to poverty, its the collective
responsibility of the society which we all are part of. Yes its a sin committed
by all of us if we turn a blind eye to such cases, Islam encourages helping
people in need and does not let go any chance to help others. But it does not
mean that if we have not done good, we must embrace other unwarranted things
with open arms. In your words if society stops hounding wrong practices will it
automatically encourage good practices? Both the things need dedicated efforts,
when you construct something you also make arrangements to prevent it from
distruction, one can't be compensated for other. Both are equally important. And please don't judge Islam by mullah's actions. I
know what kind of fatwas they issued in past and continuing. Common people like
you and me have to come forward to do our bit be it constructing the society or
protecting it from distruction. Though ideal would be doing both. 08 July, 2009 00:46
Shafiq said... Lucknowite, You're right. Homosexuality has been considered
illegal traditionally be countries that were based on Abrahamic religions. Now
that many of these countries are secular, there is no need to put religious law
into common law. The difference between a drug addict and a
homosexual is simple - being homosexual does not adversely affect them or any
other person in any way. Being a drug addict harms yourself and society, which
is why it is criminalised. Despite the opinion being divided, many experts will
tell the ill effects of homosexuality and treat it as disorder. There is no medical evidence that homosexuality can
be treated, and seeing as it doesn't harm the individual, it can't be
considered a disorder. You can twist what you said the other way - why treat
homosexuality as a crime and a disorder before it can be proven to have
negative effects? And yes, you do have a right to oppose homosexuality
and voice your disapproval. What you don't have the right to do, is call for it
to be made illegal. 08 July, 2009 03:59
Mark Zamen said... It seems we have much to learn from our medieval
predecessors. While the court ruling in India decriminalizing homosexuality is
unquestionably a step in the right direction, there remains a large segment of
society, both in the U.S. and abroad, that still regards gay men and women as
second-class citizens - or worse. That is the salient point of my recently
released biographical novel, Broken Saint. It is based on my forty-year
friendship with a gay man, and chronicles his internal and external struggles
as he battles for acceptance (of himself and by others). More information on
the book is available at www.eloquentbooks.com/BrokenSaint.html. Mark Zamen, author 09 July, 2009 17:16
Adal said... Indscribe has gone on the ninth cloud after reading
the HC order ,which has just"decrimilnalised homosexualacts"! This verdict could be challenged in the Supreme
Court.As a fllout of this two gays married and divorced within matters of
hours! Society is larger and more important than the laws.
such radical changes could not be made in our society.As per Quran and BIBle,
the homosexuals of Sodom and Gomorroh were destroyed by rain of stones!Let us
avoid such catastrophe in our times. 11 July, 2009 18:41
Dice said... Homosexuality is irrational and immoral behavior. It
should never be encouraged or promoted. Leave such filth to the white masses. 12 July, 2009 10:35
http://www.anindianmuslim.com/2009/07/homosexuality-in-urdu-poetry-tolerance.html |
|||||||||
