55 Comments
  • Priyank
    Posted at 19:26h, 17 June Reply

    This is highly misleading. The painting shows nothing of the kind. Not every bearded person is a muslim. In this painting, Krishna is pointing out the city of Mathura to Nandraja, who had adopted Krishna. No other person in that painting resembles anyone remotely like a Muslim.

    • SouthAsian
      Posted at 04:13h, 18 June Reply

      Priyank: You may well be right. Our source was William Dalrymple who is a very well known historian.

      https://twitter.com/dalrymplewill/status/622402276573863941

      • Priyank
        Posted at 04:19h, 18 June Reply

        These guys don’t check their stuff. This painting has been doing rounds with this misrepresentation for years now.

        • SouthAsian
          Posted at 12:13h, 18 June Reply

          Priyank: That is quite possible though I wouldn’t put Dalrymple in the category of “these guys”. Do you have a credible reference for the painting with its original title?

          • SouthAsian
            Posted at 17:23h, 19 June

            Priyank: Thanks for a very relevant comment. We can only wait for this controversy to be resolved definitively. Meanwhile, one could argue it was a good thought even if it turns out that this particular painting is misidentified. I don’t believe it is wrong to assert that there were many occasions in the past when Hindus and Muslims celebrated each others festivals together One could read Prakash Tandon’s Punjabi Century for illustrations. The celebration of Muharram in Lucknow is another example.

            https://thewire.in/religion/communal-harmony-festivals

          • Priyank
            Posted at 18:02h, 19 June

            The controversy has been resolved. This was an absurd interpretation of a painting.

            Also, it’s not the same to assert that Hindus and muslims celebrated together and to have absurd interpretation of a painting. This interpretation is offensive to the religious Hindus. And we do not believe that to show a feeling of common celebration and solidarity, it’s necessary to use one of the most revered Hindu Gods as a prop for some convenient virtue signalling. It’s really trivializing.

          • SouthAsian
            Posted at 06:10h, 20 June

            Priyank: The controversy has not been definitively resolved. In the excellent write-up you linked the expert BN Goswamy said he had never seen the painting before and the original still remains untraced. However, I now tend to the view that if and when the original is located the speculation about Eid is likely to be disproved.

            See the following for more information:
            https://scroll.in/article/883249/krishna-wasnt-pointing-at-eid-moon-but-the-controversial-painting-reminds-us-of-miniatures-lost

            As for the latter part of your comment, all I can say is that it is religious people like these that give religion a bad name.

          • Priyank
            Posted at 07:59h, 20 June

            In the absence of any indication for it being what it was purported to be, I’d consider it pretty settled. The scroll article is unnecessary and says nothing new.

            Regarding your comments about religious people, you don’t have the authority to make that judgement because you don’t understand where they are coming from. To belittle people’s belief and then to blame them for being not accepting, that’s lame and condescending on your part.

          • SouthAsian
            Posted at 10:49h, 20 June

            Priyank: And, of course, you understand full well where I am coming from which is why you are entitled to pass judgement.

Post A Comment