Indian Muslims are taking out Morchas in support of the Rohingya
Muslims. Some Muslim leaders are demanding that Rohingyas should be allowed to
stay back in India, even if it is against the national interest. This reminds
me of the following lines from Babasaheb Ambedkar’s book, ‘Thoughts on
Pakistan’. Dr. Ambedkar says,
‘The Islamic injunction to Muslims not to take the side of
non-Muslims in any strife is the basis of pan-Islamism. It is this which leads
Muslims in India to say that he is Muslim first and an Indian afterwards. It is
this sentiment that explains why the Indian Muslim has taken so small a part in
the advancement of India but has exhausted himself by taking up the cause of
Muslim countries. And why Muslim countries occupy the first place and India the
second place in their minds. Savarkar’s principle of one man one vote would
mean a democratic, Hindu majority state. It would not be a Muslim state and
hence Islam prohibits the Muslims from living in it. Islam can never allow a
true Muslim to adopt India as his motherland.’
In the Hindi movie Sarfarosh that was a runaway hit a few years
ago, the main protagonist, ACP Ajay Rathod tells his Muslim deputy, ‘Mere mulk
ko bachane ke liye mujhe kisi Salim ki jarurat nahi hai’. Through this
dialogue, Sarfarosh had tried to face the continuing distrust between the
Hindus and Muslims head-on. Whether it is about singing Vande Mataram or
standing up while the National Anthem is being played, or alleged violence over
beef-eating, controversy over Suryanamaskar or the alleged denial of housing to
Muslim tenants, there is a question often being asked by Muslim leaders and
self-professed liberals, ‘Why are Indian Muslims constantly being pushed into
the convict’s stand’?
It is a valid question, one that demands a truthful answer. But
this question cannot be answered unless we acquaint ourselves with history as
well the present. The first part of trying to solve any problem is to identify
the scope of the problem clearly and then try to find solutions. So let us accept
the hypothesis of Muslim leaders that Indian Muslims are being constantly
pushed on the defensive because non-Muslims in India have a feeling of mistrust
towards the Muslims. Many Indian writers, from Swatantryaveer Savarkar to
Babasaheb Ambedkar to Sheshrao More have written about the Muslim mindset.
Reading these writing would be instructive to anyone, especially, Muslims.
It is a fact that Muslims from the Indian subcontinent have been
possessed with an idea called Pan-Islamism for many decades now. ‘All Muslims
in the world are united by their faith and they form a pan-Islamic identity
that is stronger than any national boundaries’ is the core idea behind
Pan-Islamism. This is the reason why Indian Muslims feel compelled to agitate
for the rights of Palestinians, Rohingyas or any other Islamic group that is
being persecuted in their opinion.
Mustafa Kemal Ata Turk, the leader of Turkey, officially
abolished the Islamic Caliphate. As per the consensus of Islamic majority over
the centuries, the caliphate was the core political concept of Islam, and the
Calipha was believed be the leader of all Muslims, and not just of the Muslims
in Turkey. Abolition of Caliphate sent out shock waves among the Muslims of the
world, and Indian Muslims were not an exception. Indian Muslims started the
Khilafat movement, a pan-Islamic political protest campaign in support of the
Turkish Caliphate. Many Hindu Congress leaders like Mahatma Gandhi had
supported the Khilafat movement. But subsequent Moplah riots of Kerala where
the Mappilah Muslims of Kerala murdered, raped and forcibly converted Hindus
opened the eyes of many Hindu Congress leaders. Lala Lajpatrai, Lala Hardayal
and Swatyantraveer Savarkar were a few of them. Moplah riots forced Dr.
Hedgewar to change his loyalties from the Indian National Congress to establish
the RSS, as an organisation to unite the Hindus.
The rift caused by the Khilafat movement among the Hindus and
Muslims could never be bridged over. The seed of the two-nation theory was
planted during the Khilafat movement. Eventually, it resulted in the bloody
partition of India on the basis of religion. Islamic Republic of Pakistan and
the Democratic Republic of India became independent countries in 1947. A
significant number of Muslims chose to stay back in India. However, did the
ghost of Pan-Islamism stop haunting the Indian Muslims even after partition?
The answer will have to be in the negative.
Immediately after independence, Indian Muslims underlined the
fact that they are ‘different’ by asking for laws based on Shariah to govern
the civil affairs of Indian Muslims. When the constituent assembly met to draft
a modern democratic constitution for India, as the Chairman of the Dr.
Babasaheb Ambedkar was well aware that India needs a fully secular constitution
which will take precedence over all religious codes. However, leaders of Indian
Muslims, including moderates like Maulana Azad insisted on a separate Islamic
Civil Code based on Shariah. The sacred principle of ‘One nation, One Law’
could not be implemented and society continued to be split. This eventually
resulted in the Shahbano case, where a court judgement was reversed and a
regressive law was passed that pushed the struggle by Muslim women for equality
back by decades!
Indian Muslims need to realise the idea of Pan-Islamism is a
mirage. Many Indian Muslims have a soft corner for Saudi Arabia as it is the
birthplace of Islam. But how does Saudi Arabia treat Muslims of other
nationalities? Indian Muslims who have lived and worked in Saudi Arabia for
years do not have the right to become a citizen there. They are treated like
second class citizens. Saudi Arabia is a rich country, but how many Rohingyas
or Iraqis or Palestinian refugees has it accepted?
Pakistan was allegedly created to be a ‘paradise for all
Muslims’. What is the status of Shias, Ahmediyas, Balochis and Hazra Muslims in
Pakistan? Why are Muslims who migrated from India still being called Mohajirs
and treated like pariahs in Pakistan? When the predominantly Punjabi Muslim
army of Pakistan massacred 30 lakh Bengali Muslims in 1971, who was responsible
for the genocide? Jews, Americans or Hindus? When Muslims flee Islamic
countries as refugees, like in Iraq and Syria, why do they risk life and limb
to reach Europe? Why do none of the oil-rich Islamic states like Qatar, Kuwait,
Saudi and UAE open their doors to Muslim refugees?
There is a lot of talk about Muslims being ‘uneasy and scared’
in India today. India has a Hindu majority, and yet, when there was an ethnic
cleansing of Kashmiri Hindus from the valley, did Muslims in any other part of
India feel persecuted? Have the Hindus ever tried to subvert the nation’s laws
using their strength in numbers? The average Hindu doesn’t want special rights
for Hindus. He just wants the same rights for all and special privileges for
none.
With the advent of social media and the spread of the internet,
the world has become a global village. We know what is happening in Barcelona
or Dhaka within a few moments at the click of a mouse. Everyone has information
at his/her fingertips and opinions are being formed accordingly. Each time
there is a terror attack anywhere in the world, the needle of suspicion
automatically points at Muslims first. That is a fact, and unfortunately, in an
overwhelming majority of cases, the suspicion turns out to be true. Indian
Muslims dislike being made to be defensive, but have they tried to introspect
why most of the terror acts in the world today are committed in the name of
Islam?
No matter which country they live in, Muslim populations always
demands special rights, privileges and protection, but Islamic states never
grant that privilege to its non-Islamic populations. Have Indian Muslims spoken
out against this hypocrisy? Each time there is an Islamic Terror attack anywhere
in the world, the stereotypical reaction of the average Muslim is, ‘But this is
not the real Islam’ or ‘Terror has no religion’. Next, they come up with wild
conspiracy theories like ‘the jews did it’ or ‘American policies are
responsible for it’. Why is there no genuine attempt to look within by the
Islamic society?
Fact is, this notion of Islamic victimhood is turning the
average Muslim blind to the changing geo-political reality of the world. US
drops a 10,000 ton bomb in Afghanistan just to kill a few jehadis. No one bats
an eyelid. Rohingyas leave Myanmar and seek refuge in other countries, the
world is not particularly concerned. Global society is slowly, but surely
turning indifferent towards the Muslims. But very few Indian Muslims are willing
to even face this reality, let alone trying to find the reasons behind it.
Instead, they spend all their time playing ‘minority politics’. The tiniest
minority in India are the Parsis. They are less than 100,000 in number, and
yet, no one doubts their commitment to India, not are they ever asked to
furnish the proof of their ‘deshbhakti’. Even though the Parsis are so few in
number, no Parsi leader has ever said Parsis are feeling ‘uneasy and scared’ in
India, but Muslims, who form almost 11 percent of India’s population keep
crying that they feel ‘insecure’.
The reason behind this is the silence of the majority of Indian
Muslims. It is true that only a small section of Muslims support terrorism. But
it is these violent Jehadis who have become the face of global Islam today
because the majority has chosen to stay silent. How many Muslims spoke up loud
and clear in the Salman Rushdie or Charlie Hebdo cases and denounced Islamic
fundamentalism? It is because of the actions of a few and the tacit silence of
the many that 150 crore Muslims find themselves being judged by the others in
various countries of the world.
All existing religions in the world were founded centuries ago.
All have had customs, traditions and laws that may have been valid then, but
sound ridiculous and inhuman now. Even Hindus had ugly and violent traditions
like Sati and untouchability. But the reformists from within in the religion
spoke up against them and led the society to discard these inhumane traditions.
Overwhelming majority of the Hindus supported the reformists and not the
orthodox people where were opposing the reforms. Even today, the reform
movement in Hinduism is going on.
Unfortunately, the few people who tried to reform Islam in India
died a lonely death, like Hamid Dalwai. Dalwai’s colleague, Prof. Mumtaz
Rahimatpure was initially denied an Islamic burial in Kolhapur after her death
because the community leaders declared her blasphemous. Her family members had
to give an undertaking that they are devout Muslims for her body to be given a
proper Islamic burial.
Is India really an intolerant country as it is made out to be by
a few self-proclaimed liberals and Indian Muslim leaders? Parsis, Jews, Shias,
Ahmediyas have been welcomed in this country since centuries and have since then
integrated so well in the Indian society that never have they felt ‘uneasy and
insecure’. Why is it that only Indian Muslims feel insecure despite their large
numbers? In fact, it is the Hindus of this country who feel insecure when they
see mobs of thousands gathered for a funeral procession of a convicted
terrorist. It is the Hindu who feels insecure when a mob of thousands of
Muslims gather in Mumbai to protest against the persecution of Rohingyas by
Myanmar and kick and destroy a national memorial, attack and grope female
police officers and destroy police stations. It is the Hindu who feels insecure
when thousands of Kashmiri Hindus are given the choice of ‘Ralive, Chalive ya
Galive’ (Convert, leave or get killed) in one night! It is the Hindu who feels
insecure when innocent pilgrims on Amarnath Yatra are shot at by terrorists. It
is this insecurity on the part of the Hindu society that gives birth to
dialogues like ‘mere desh ko bachane ke liye mujhe kisi Salim ki jarurat nahi
hai’.
If this situation has to be changed, Indian Muslims have to come
out of their self-imposed ghettos and be vocal. They need to take definite
positions on questions like supremacy of the Indian constitution or their
religious book, Shivaji or Aurangzeb. It is not enough to reiterate that ‘Islam
is a religion of peace’. If Islam is to be indeed a religion of peace, Indian
Muslims need to be speak loud and clear against violent Al-Qaeda form of Islam.
Issues like loudspeakers on mosques, right of Muslim women to wear the clothes
that they want to or Triple Talaq need to be debated openly from both within
the community as well as with non-Muslims. Indian Muslims need to realise that
their so-called leaders do not serve their interests by making statements like
‘In 15 minutes we will finish the Hindus if the police are taken out of the
picture’.
Islam needs to have its own reformist movement that looks at its
traditions critically and discards outdated concepts like Pan-Islamism,
Ghazwa-E-Hind or Dar-Ul-Harb. Indian Muslims need to mobilise themselves to
protest against issues that give a bad name to Islam like the destruction of
Bamiyan Buddhas rather than destroying public property over the perceived
persecution of Muslims in other countries. Everyone who lives in this country must
accept that the law of the land and the Indian constitution rules supreme. It
is only then that the mistrust between Muslims and other communities will
vanish.
In the movie Sarfarosh, the Muslim character Salim replies to
ACP Rathod with a terse, ’aap bharosa to kijiye, ek nahi, hazaro Salim mil
jayenge’. I firmly believe that there are millions of such Salims in India, who
consider themselves Indian above all else, but they need to speak up and not
take refuge in silence. As Martin Luther King Jr put it so succinctly, ‘the
greatest tragedy of this period of social transition is not the strident
clamour of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people.’ If
Indian Muslims have to demolish this cage of victimhood, they need to break
their silence!
Original Article in Marathi - Tushar Damgude
English Translation - Shefali Vaidya
