Hard hitting letter to the CEO of Tanishq!

 

Reproducing here an excellent and pertinent lettter the CEO of Tanishq over their advertisement fiasco. Recieved this over whatsapp so cannot confirm its authenticity or the senders credentials. Irrespective of the origin I must say the message is very relevant, especially the reference to TATA's Persian roots and the fate of tolerance under Islamic rule. Read and think.

Mr Ajoy Chawla
Chief Executive Officer - Jewellery
Titan Company Limited
Integrity
#193 Veerasandra, Electronic City P.O.
Off Hosur Main Road, Bengaluru - 560100
Karnataka, India
Email corpcomm@titan.co.in

Subject; Tanishq Jewellery's recent advertisement promoting the ‘Ekatvam’ line

Dear Mr Chawla,

This is WRT your recent advertisment promoting the Ekatvam line of jewellery by Tanishq, a division of Titan.

A daughter-in-law, suggestedly a Hindu, is visibly grateful of a mother-in-law, depicted as a Muslim, at her baby shower. The ceremonies, Hindu in nature, are being carried out in the mother-in-law's Muslim household.

The advertisement is supposed to enhance 'oneness' by depicting inter-faith matrimony. This is to be considered in the spirit of 'Ekatvam' symbolising 'oneness'. Tanishq holds afloat on high-moral and it's product line is omnipresent at this generous ceremony, it's jewellery adoring the youthful bride's neck, ears and arms.

Your company has since been accused of propagating falsehood. A rosy depiction of a lie that lulls the Hindu girl into a make-believe scenario whereas reality is distant and devious. Those who have opposed it have been labelled bigots by the 'secular' section that has criticised the withdrawal of the advertisement. Ironically, Tanishq's effort at depicting 'oneness' has severely divided society, hence achieving the exact opposite of what it set out to do.

However, 'bigoted' emotions aside, if examined factually, would your campaign hold?

Having thus far rejected a Uniform Civil Code in India, Muslims marry as per the Shariat law. This mandates the non-Muslim, in this case the Hindu girl, to convert to Islam. A civil marriage, if resorted to, can deprive the children of their inheritance from the Muslim parent as per the Shariat. Marriage with a Muslim mandates conversion. As per the Shariat, a Muslim cannot marry a non-Muslim. The marriage that is the basis of this advertisement does not hold sanctity with the Muslim in-laws of the bride unless she has converted and abandoned her ways of worship prior to the conversion. (The advertisement is suggestive of the in-laws' orthodoxy given that the mother-in-law is in a hijab. This is certainly not progressive) The late V S Naipaul dwelt elaborately in his tome 'Among the Believers' where he lamented foregone cultures that had given way to Islam. Islam, he concluded, wipes the slate clean when it establishes it's writ. Naipaul would have rejected your thesis. Any depiction of Hindu ceremonies, therefore, is a sham, a falsehood and an empty ritual. This can and should be perceived as an insult by the Hindu community.

Your creative team obviously hadn't done it's homework with regard to realities, legal and social,  of the framework they knit for this campaign. The overwhelming negative response may been a surprise to them.

Secularism in India is always at the cost of Hindu generosity. In medieval times, the Hindus paid 'jaziya' to retain their faith under the 'magnanimous' Muslim' rulers. The terms of existence were defined against them. Elaborate documentation exists about dictates issued by the Muslim courts to destroy the temples and convert the 'infidels'. Where then is the 'oneness' to hark back at?

Tanishq has chosen to imagine our history much in the manner of the post-Independence historians. To add insult to injury, the release of your advertisement coincides with the ninety-ninth anniversary of the 'Moplah massacre' when Muslims slaughtered thousands of Hindus in northern Kerala. In the cruelest twist to irony, ‘Moplah’ is a corruption of ‘Mappila’, a Malayalee term used often to address the son-in-law. In a bid to promote 'ekatvam' with the nineth century Arab traders who settled in Kerala, the local ruler encouraged them to marry local girls. The Arab Muslims were thus referred to as 'Mappilas' and over time as ‘Moplahs’. The reference has not been a memorable one since 1921. Had the effort at 'ekatvam or oneness' been reciprocatory, the Tata Group may well have existed in PERSIA. You may derive solace that it didn't happen that way since you owe your job in India to that. There is little else for you to congratulate yourself for.

Copy to; 1. Mr C K Venkataraman, Managing Director, Titan Company Ltd