Some readers have requested me to share my opinion about the ongoing #BHUControversy regarding the student protest over the appointment of Dr. Firoze Khan.

In this thread, I will share my views which are purely personal. Thread below

To begin with, Dr. Firoze Khan says -"Kavyas like Uttararāmacarita have nothing to do with Hinduism (religion)"

Now, Uttararāmacarita is the biography of Hindu God Rama post his coronation. It is as much Hindu as Sirat Rasul Allah (biographies of Prophet Muhammad) is Muslim.

Yet, you will never find anyone in the world classifying "Sirat Rasul Allah" under "secular Arabic literature". It is always taught by Islamic faculty adhering to traditional Islamic interpretation.

Why then is the same courtesy not extended to Kavyas like Uttararāmacarita?

Anyone who has read Uttararāmacarita will notice that beyond the superficial linguistic tropes lies the poet's deep personal devotion (Bhakti).

And then the religious, Bhakti, Dharmic & Vedic concepts that abound in the poem illustrating the historical development of Hinduism.

With all due respect to Dr. Firoze Khan's scholarship and erudition, any person who says that "Uttararāmacarita has nothing to do with Hinduism" is missing the very essence of the poem and the purpose for which it was written.

As such, he hardly inspires the confidence to teach

This isn't Dr. Firoze Khan's fault. Just that in Sanskrit the secular and religious are so beautifully intertwined that it is impossible to separate them.

Ignoring the religious concepts of Kavya and looking at it only linguistically is like seeing the world through only one eye

This isn't about Dr. Khan's personal beliefs. I am not in favor of mere mortals teaching this Kavya.

Uttararāmacarita is no ordinary Kavya.

It has

1. The banishment of Sita.

2. Killing of Shambuka.

Which has been twisted & utilized to generate greatest anti Hindu propaganda

In my experience, I have observed that Hindus have been rattled by this propaganda.

They simply can't find an explanation. They resort to making allusions,performing mental gymnastics or disowning Uttararāmacarita as fake/interpolated.

Mere linguistic erudition isn't enough.

The great epic Ramayana was composed in early Historic age when the usage of script was not as prevalent.

The poem was transmitted orally through centuries. If the epic exists with us today, all thanks to acharyas of traditional mathas and pithas who have ensured the continuity

It were these traditional Hindu religious institutions which transmitted the poem orally and also produced manuscripts to ensure its survival.

It is my considered opinion we should not deny them the exclusive right to teach what is truly theirs along with their interpretation

What was the intention of the poet behind writing his kāvyá?

The poet himself says:"I want humans to achieve Puruṣārtha" (the four ultimate goals of life: Dharma, Artha, Kāma, Moksha)

And how is Puruṣārtha achieved?

"By Bhakti (complete devotion) towards lotus feet of Rama"

Now I wonder how a person, whose monotheistic religion forbids him from cultivating any Bhakti towards God Rāma, could appreciate, understand and teach the beautiful expressions of Bhakti that the entire Kāvya is brimming with once we look beyond the superficial linguistic tropes

The great poets like Kālidāsa, Bhavabhūti, Murāri Miśra didn't want their poems to be read as literary exhibits.

Their stated purpose behind composing poems was to cultivate Bhakti among masses.

Classifying their Sāhitya as "secular literature" is blatant cultural appropriation

And this poem of the Adi Śaṅkarācārya concludes my thread