‘Aamir Khan-starrer PK was received wholeheartedly by the majority Hindus, because they took it as a creation of art. Hindus believe God is omnipotent: HE doesn’t need your protection. But the film-makers exposed their superfluous knowledge of the religion — epitomised by “Vasudhaiva kutumbakam” — by writing a misplaced dialogue for the corrupt godman: “Beta humein apne Bhagwan ki raksha karna ata hai”
PK, the role assayed by Aamir Khan in the movie, is an alien with just the initials, without any religious, cultural or political identity. He does not directly question God but the belief systems, rituals and practices that humans have created to reach God. Any rational person would agree that if the money spent on building religious structures and visiting religious places is used for the welfare of the poor, no one in this world would sleep unfed and unprotected.
But then, we would also have to agree that before building malls, theatres, museums or community centres, the government should make sure that every citizen does have a roof over his head. And since “charity begins at home”, we would appeal to the film-makers and actors to donate the profits earned from this movie for the welfare of the poor, irrespective of religion, caste and creed. The official budget spent on the making of PK was approximately Rs118 crore. This amount would have been sufficient to construct 50,000 toilets for the rural poor or 25,000 temporary houses for the homeless, still sleeping on the footpath in this severe cold.
Coming to the argument, does only building a temple cost moneyIJ Doesn’t building a mosque or church cost moneyIJ If visiting a far off Hindu temple is illogical, how can going for Hajj be logicalIJ Many would argue that the movie hasn’t justified it either but it has deliberately left it unquestioned. Is it just because Muslims are too sensitive about this issueIJ In fact, pilgrimage means embarking on a journey to rediscover oneself through suffering. But anything forced is a strict “no no”.
The movie depicts how the family of an Indian Hindu girl is opposed to her marriage with a Pakistani Muslim boy. But one needs to understand the reasons behind the initial rejection. It is not the religion alone but the whole set of culture that is associated with a particular religion or region that counts. Naturally when we are positioned in a different culture we become apprehensive. So instead of portraying Hindus as conservative, the film-makers should have depicted the thought process of both the families.
The practice of idol worship in Hinduism has been highly satirised. We too believe that God doesn’t exist in idols. But don’t we respect the photographs of our parents and grandparents in absence of their physical presenceIJ Every idol has immense philosophical significance and a story which helps us to understand the mysteries of life. The way Shiva is portrayed in the movie is demeaning.
Hence if the film-makers really wanted to educate the people regarding the misuse of the practice of idol worship, they should have done it in an unbiased way. Even the religions, who claim to be against idol worship, use religious photographs. One can find the photograph of Mecca-Medina in every Muslim household. WhenPK was distributing the pamphlets of ‘lapata Bhagwan’ (lost God), instead of showing only Hindu Gods and Goddess, images of Mecca-Medina, darghas, Jesus and Sikh gurus could have been included.
WhilePK has satirised the practice of Hindus offering coconut, flowers and incense sticks, why has it maintained silence on the Muslims’ practice of offering chaddar and roses at the dargahIJ Though the prohibition of wine at mosques and dargahs have been portrayed which one may argue is a positive practice, but even Hindus follow the same. Offering money to please God is wrong, be it practiced at temples or dargahs or churches. So why highlight temples aloneIJ
PK asks why God would want His children to roll on the ground and suffer if they want something. While quite delicately the movie has shown clippings of PK going through all kinds of rituals and sufferings be it rolling on the ground, wildly beating himself causing bleeding or taking the Holy Bath, but except rolling on the ground which is Hindu specific, the rest have not been verbally questioned. Rolling on the ground is an act of faith and penance just as the wildly beating of one’s own chest in mourning of Muharrum, offering namaz five times a day, keeping ‘Roza’ during the holy month and keeping lent. Everything is illogical in all religions if questioned, but the same things make sense if believed.
The movie portrays a corrupt Hindu godman. Yes these frauds should be exposed. But does every religion not have this kind of self-proclaimed godmen or messengers of godIJ What else explains the conversion of poor Hindus into Christianity during Colonialisation on the pretext of giving food and shelterIJ The entire world is terrorised by the inhuman concepts ofjehad. What forces guide the young and sometimes unemployed men to be jehadisIJ How can we forget the recent inhuman killing of 132 innocent children at PeshwarIJ
In a scene, while arguing with the alien, the Hindu godman says, “Beta humein apne Bhagwan ki raksha karna ata hai (We know how to save our god).” This statement is quite controversial as this kind of statement is generally made by Islamic terrorists waging jehad as they feel “Islam is in danger” and they need to protect it. Hinduism believes in the incarnation of lord Vishnu, who takes new birth to protect humanity and destroy the evil. Hindus don’t believe in protecting God, who is omnipotent. Rather they believe and depend on God to protect them.
Creation of art is almost never innocent. It is influenced by the ideologies we believe in or compelled to believe in due to political, social and cultural pressures. Artistic creation is always welcomed but the problem arises when an artist deliberately and cleverly uses his art to serve the purpose of a particular group or its financers. The nexus among film-makers, mafia, underworld and politicians, and the use of black money in the film industry are an open secret. Hence an artist’s creation is influenced by the motives of the financers. Since art and films have a large impact on the society, they are used as a tool to influence the opinion of the people.
Due to these reasons, on many occasions in the past, the Government had banned many movies and plays. The famous play Me Nathuram Godse Boltoy was banned by the Government of Maharashtra, and a fashionable portrayal of Nirbhaya rape case in Delhi in 2012 had created outrage among activists. A lot of films such as Gokul Shanker (1963), Aandhi (1975), Kissa Kursi Ka (1977), Hawayein (2003), The Pink Mirror (2004), Amu (2005), and No Fire Zone (2014) were banned by the contemporary Congress Government at the Centre.
The bias representation of a particular religion in PK has raised questions in our mind about the intentions of the film-makers given the volatile political scenario when there is a huge outcry regarding “love jehad and ghar wapsi”. The box office statement of PK is a living example of the tolerance and acceptance power of Hinduism. In a country where Hindus are a majority, apart from a very small group protesting, all have accepted the movie wholeheartedly. But can the same be said of any other religionsIJ If a cartoon can kill 12, how many would an entire movie have slaughtered, we wonderIJ
We now dare the film-makers to make a movie criticising other religions and realise what really fundamentalism means.
(Both Anish Gupta and Aaleya Giri are founder members of Shoptodina Foundation, and they teach Economics and English respectively at the University of Delhi)