Puppets Of Faith Theory Of Communal Strife (A critical appraisal of Islamic faith, Indian polity ‘n more)

Home > Literature > Puppets Of Faith Theory Of Communal Strife (A critical appraisal of Islamic faith, Indian polity ‘n more) > Page 25
Puppets Of Faith Theory Of Communal Strife (A critical appraisal of Islamic faith, Indian polity ‘n more) Page 25

by BS Murthy


  Moreover, the undying Muslim nostalgia for the Islamic heydays of yore in an otherwise gloomy scenario of the modern era of the M usalmans is evident, say, when it comes to choosing a foreign language as part of college curriculum; Muslim boys and girls invariably tend to choose Persian; and once when asked in a media survey, why it was so, the unwavering answer was, because it is hukummat ki jabdn - the ruling tongue; well, Persian was the court language of the M oguls. It's thus, far removed from the current realities of the world; Musalmans remain as fossils of royal frogs in the shallow Islamic wells of the past in their impoverished mohallas.

  Thanks to the Quranic brainwash, poverty is not something that weighs the M usalmans down, as generally is the case with the rest of mankind, since for them life 'here' is but a 'pastime' of an enabling time to reach the 'Hereafter'.

  "Naught is the life of the world save a pastime and a sport. Better far is the abode of the Hereafter for those who keep their duty (to Allah). Have ye then no sense?"

  "Those who love the life of the world more than the Hereafter, and debar (men) from the way of Allah and would have it crooked: such are far astray."

  Not only that, even when they venture out into the kafir arena, they wear their false sense of superiority on their sleeves notwithstanding their social or economic condition, and / or both. Nevermind their illiteracy, not to be mistaken with Islamic awareness, even their women tend to be overbearing with kafirs, which is exemplified in the way they evict 'the other' men from the reserved seats for women in the city buses, moreso in the M uslim dominant areas, for which trespass their well-educated Hindu sisters, for most part, would have remained mute spectators.

  But the Hindu left-libs, who vouch for the M usalmans though there's nothing of a left ideology in Islam and what's worse, it suppresses every liberal outlook whatsoever is there. Nevertheless, as all these espy things M uslim through the myopic prism built with their Islamapologic glasses, so naturally they get the Indian Islamic scenario all wrong. Well, even though they harp on the Muslim backwardness, yet they desist from advocating secular education for the M usalmans; they shed secular crocodile tears over umma's economic plight but dare not advise the faithful to trim the unsustainable size of their families; they subscribe to the alleged discrimination by Hindus against the M usalmans but shy away from reminding them about their Islamic hostility towards 'the others'; they condemn, rightly so, any stray case of a Hindu roughshod over a M usalman or two Hindu, but whenever the boot is on the wrong M uslim leg, which is more often than not, they close their eyes and shut their mouth; they endorse the fact that India belongs to Hindus as much as it to its Musalmans but fail to condemn the latter's averment that 'Islam is above India' and 'sharia is over its constitution', and this hypocritical exercise in Islamapologic chicanery goes on and on, and that has come to sicken the Hindus.

  But what with the double squeeze from within by the mullahs and without by Islamapologists, needless to say, the umma stays as is where, and what is worse, some of them want it to be taken farther back to its medieval past. This about sums up the Islamic paradox for in these days even as 'the others' want to go forward, the umma has begun to crave to move backwards to its medieval origins of barbaric purity.

  Chapter 31 The Way Around

  While the wise use their abilities as the building blocks of life, the bigots turn their dogmas into its stumbling blocks, and same applies to nation building or causing its ruination, Pakistan being a living example of the latter. However, in what is left of Arya Varta, it is a socio-political reality that even as the Hindus cannot wish away the preponderant M uslim presence in it, there is no way the M usalmans can turn it into a dar al-lslam either. So, as the Union of India, Allah Ta'ala willing, would forever remain a place of Hindu-Muslim conglomeration, it is only wise for both to realise that their future is firmly rooted in this common communal ground.

  Sadly for the Indian umma, the gullible Arabs of yore catapulted their 'cult of M uhammad' onto the altar of faith as the 'religion of Islam', which deludes the deprived 'here' by dangling the doles in 'the hereafter', and that takes the umma's poor neither here nor there in the modern 'world of opportunities'; and as Martin Lings noted, M uhammad had encouraged his followers to imbibe this anti-progress ethos thus:

  "All took part in the work, (the construction of a mosque in Medina) including the Prophet himself, and as they worked they chanted two verses which one of them had made up for the occasion:

  0 god, no good is but the good h

  So help the Helpers and the Emigrants.

  And sometimes they chanted,

  No life there is but life of the Here

  M ercy, 0 God, on Emigrants and Helpers."

  Well, the source of this inspiration, as seen in the preceding chapter, is none other than the Quran that extols poverty. Besides, what else Muhammad had to offer his handful of followers then than the solace of poverty, as the booty to share with them was not on the table as yet then. However, it is this inculcated disregard for life 'here' in his followers that enabled him to psyche them later to the myth of martyrdom with huries and all in the 'Hereafter' that stood him in good stead to settle scores with his detractors that is apart from laying his hands on the Spoils of War, which is nothing but the God-sanctified booty.

  Besides, it is proved beyond doubt that the Muslim educational backwardness is sourced in umma's abominable fear of exposing its kids to non-lslamic education lest they should lose their faith in the outdated ideas that Islam represents. Surely, their fears are not unfounded for the Islamic edifice of faith was built on Quranic pillars of artificial belief, and once the latter are weakened the former would collapse like a house of cards. So it can be said 'artificial' belief is at once the strength and weakness of Islam and who knows that better than its moulvis, and that's what makes it a cult but not a religion.

  That's why, the Saudi ruling family, the guardian of the Kabah has always been alive to the threat the modern education poses to the set of Islamist beliefs that are the pillars of their House of Saud. So, the curriculum of the secondary schools, set aside the primary stuff, is Islamic all the way, of course with M uhammad's life and times thrown in between; the madrasa academic drill comprises of Islam, the Quran, the hadith, the sunna with mathematics for a change. It's thus, to the umma-moulded M usalman mindset, anything that is non-lslamic is akin to un-lslamic.

  No wonder thus, the Indian M usalmans, for most part, who imitate the Sunni Saudis, are worse off educationally and economically than even the once oppressed Hindus, their erstwhile caste cousins, since they tend to lead a ghetto-like life in isolated pockets in abominable conditions, compared even to the substandard amenities available in the Hindu localities. And compounding their misery is their penchant to rear more children than their means would will, and that either forces them to reduce their progeny into child labor or consign them to the madrasa education, which only cultivates in them the fundamentalist impulses that are inimical to their economic wellbeing.

  It is seldom appreciated that as sex is more in the human mind than in its libido, the occupation of man has a bearing on his sexual impulse, which in turn determines the frequency of conception by his mate(s). While it's in the nature of the white collar jobs and intellectual pursuits to put cerebral demands on the minds of men, and women, thereby distracting their minds away from sexual focus, the manual jobs or petty trades won't constrain those engaged in them in a like manner, whereby letting their libido to have a free reign on their minds. In case of the M usalmans, even as their 'believing' Islamic minds are spared of intellectual strain, their mundane pursuits of the latter category free them from cerebral engagement, whereby affording them more frequent coition. Needless to say, such a cohabitation sans family planning, which is conveniently

  touted as un-lslamic, would be more conducive for unbridled procreation; though same is the case with the similarly placed Hindus, yet there's a growing tendency among them to adopt the two-child family norm.


  So, it is imperative for the ulema of the umma to realise that the penchant of the Musalmans for reckless procreation, besides keeping them poor and illiterate - pitying them, by now, the All-Merciful Allah Ta'ala would have certainly changed his mind but for the lack of communication means, is unable to convey the same to them - has been raising the demographic hackles of the Hindus. But for that they have to get rid of their Ghazwa-e-Hind illusion and dar al-lslam world delusion, at least after the Chinese treatment of their Uyghur brethren. Whatever, the depravities and the disparities of the Indian M usalmans 'here' are for real but they don't seem to mind as long as Islam is not in danger, and egging on them to remain that way are the Islamapologists in their pseudo-secular garbs, who routinely shed crocodile tears to score Brownie 'secular' points; if the Musalmans were to imbibe liberal attitudes, of what relevance could be the Islamapologic platitudes of the media savvy Satan's?

  Just the same, the real indicator of the Indian Musalmans' backwardness is their collective inability to address their socio-economic plight. Why should they, when their Quran dissuades them against all that. That being the case, would ever the Muslim masses question the conventional wisdom of their community in investing their children's future in Islam through the madrasa modules? After all, they should realise that their economic wellbeing would forever remain a mirage on the Islamic straight path as the madrasas lead their children onto the misery 'here' though with a promise of joys in the 'hereafter'.

  Sadly for the umma's poor, madrasas are no more than the wells of Islamic dogma with moulvis being their resident frogs, at best helping their pupils memorize the Quran and at worst making bigots out of them with additional inputs from hadith 'n sunna. So, what are the madrasas if not the Quranic pillars of the masjids to keep the faith going the way it was from Muhammad's time; even otherwise, of what avail is the secular education to them; the sight of the few middle-class Muslim girls going to the Indian secular temples of higher learning all wrapped up in burkas only proves that no course material can make the Indian M usalmans' Arabian outlook acquire a new look.

  It's another matter though that this Islamic mess into which they habitually allow themselves to get into would only enable 'the others', whom they, any way, keep at an arm's length, to become even more apathetic towards them. Well, there seems to be no end to the psychic dichotomy of the M usalmans, and Kemal Ataturks and Anwar Sadats, in their scores, are to be born in every galli of each M uslim mohalla to make it right for them. That, perhaps, is too much to hope for, anyway. But for now, the M usalmans are ever on the lookout for the ways and means to assert their Islamic separateness, which, for the muse of a poet would seem: Oh, goddamn faith, how thou divide 'the God' from the gods and M usalmans from the other men!

  Well, if only the maulanas, for a solution to their separatist constraints, approach Muhammad's life and times, not in thrall but with insight, for that there are pointers aplenty, penned by M artin Lings. They would then realize that M uhammad's ability to strike strategic compromises made him what he was, and enabled him to take his faith to the kabah. The social compromise devised by Muhammad for the Muslim-Jewish amity and his concessions to the theological demands of the Quraysh, cited below, could guide the Indian M usalmans in fashioning a Hindu - M uslim compromise.

  "It was to be hoped that these two parties would be strengthened by a third, and the Prophet now made a covenant of mutual obligation between his followers and the Jews of the oasis, forming them into a single community of believers but allowing for the

  differences between the two religions. M uslims and Jews were to have equal status. If a Jew were wronged, then he must be helped to his rights by both M uslim and Jew, and so also if a M uslim were wronged. In case of war against the polytheists they must fight as one people, and neither Jews nor M uslims were to make a separate peace, but peace was to be indivisible. In case of differences of opinion or dispute or controversy, the matter was to be referred to God through His Messenger. There was, however, no express stipulation that the Jews should formally recognize Muhammad as the Messenger and Prophet of God, though he was referred to as such throughout the document."

  Of course, this gesture by Muhammad was in his early Yathrib, nay Medina days, which was much before the Quran poured venom on the neighborhood Jews (besides the Christians and idolaters) and he gave vent to his wrath on them. Leaving that aside, the all-important religious concession of M uhammad as recorded by M artin Lings makes an interesting reading.

  "Quraysh now sent Suhayl to conclude a treaty (with Muhammad), and with him were his two clansmen M ikraz and Hwaytib. They conferred with the Prophet, and the Companions heard their voices rise and fall according to whether the point in question was hard to agree upon or easy. When they had finally reached an agreement the Prophet told 'AN to write down the terms, beginning with the revealed words of consecration Bismi Llahi r-Rahmani r-Rahim, in the Name of God, the Good, the M erciful, but Suhayl objected. "As to Rahman," he said, "I know not what he is. But write Bismik Allahumma, in Thy Name, 0 God, as thou wert wont to write."

  Some of the Companions cried out "By God, we will write naught but Bismi Lalhi rRahmani r-Rahim," but the Prophet ignored them and said "Write Bismik Allahumma," and he went on dictating: "these are the terms of the truce between Muhammad the Messenger of God and Suhayal the son of 'Amr"; but again Suhayl protested. "If we knew thee to be the M essenger of God." he said, "we would not have barred thee from the House, neither would we have fought thee; but write Muhammad the son of 'Abd Allah."

  'AN had already written "The M essenger of God," and the Prophet told him to strike out those words, but he said he could not. So the Prophet told him to point with his finger to the words in question, and he himself stuck them out*. Then he told him to write in their place "the son of 'Abd Allah,” which he did.

  The document continued: "They have agreed to lay down the burden of war for ten years, in which times men shall be safe and not lay violent hands the one upon the other; on condition that whoso cometh unto M uhammad of Quraysh without the leave of his guardian, Muhammad shall return him unto them; but whoso cometh unto Quraysh of those who are with M uhammad, they shall not be returned. They shall be no subterfuge and no treachery. And who so wisheth to enter into the bond and pact of M uhammad may do so; and who so wisheth to enter into the bond and pact of Quraysh may do so."

  Well, every Musalman could be privy to this episode but few, if any, would have delved deep into it to question the unquestionable; what does this protest by Suhayl mean?

  "If we knew thee to be the M essenger of God, we would not have barred thee from

  the House, neither would we have fought thee.”

  Won't it go without saying that none in the Arabia then heard Allah announce that he had sent Muhammad as his messenger to them, but it was Muhammad who had proclaimed himself as the Messenger of 'the God' for them? If not, Suhayl and others

  would not have said what they said to Muhammad about his divine claim without a mundane witness to name.

  Even beyond the boundaries of belief, it is the penchant of the faithful, not just the M usalmans, to assert that all that is there to know can be found in between the covers of their religious scriptures. While nothing can be farther from the truth, the Quran portrays many a divine contradictions, one of which is refreshingly welcome in that as against its averment all through that it carries for man the final message of the God, it states that, "Such of Our revelations as we abrogate or cause to be forgotten, we bring (in place) one better or the like thereof. Knowest though not that Allah is able to do all things."

  Moreso, underscoring the need for a periodic Islamic update, Muhammad had also said, "Islam began as a stranger and will become once more as a stranger," and promised to his flock that 'the God' would not abandon them,

  "God will send to this community, at the head of every hundred years, one who will renew for it its religion."

  That being the case, wonder the way the umma shuns the reformist
M usalmans, few and far in between anyway, and what's worse, its ulema brands such as apostates and condemns them to death. Maybe in that sense, in that sense alone, Bernard Shaw is right in opining that Islam is the best religion with the worst followers.

  Above all, Quran also affirms that:

  "If all the trees in the end were pens, and if the sea eked out by seven seas more were ink, the Words of God, could not be written out into their end.”

  Thus, isn't it ironical that Allah Ta'ala should have exhorted his faithful to unquestioningly believe what he supposedly revealed to his Messenger in the Quran? It's as if what the God gave the M usalmans with his right hand, he took it back from them with his left hand thereby leaving them stranded on the 'straight path' he paved for them. Hence, what sense doth it make for the M usalmans to believe that the quranhadith-sunna trio is the 'be all and end all' of the divine guidance; well it is for them to think.

  Be that as it may, it is imperative for the M usalmans of the day to understand that a review of Islam is overdue, which, their prophet himself felt that it would need from time to time. Why not the maulanas of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (no mistaking it as an elected body of Indian M usalmans) take the lead in not only reviewing the 'out of tune' features of their faith but also in seeking honourable compromises with the Hindus on all contentious issues as M uhammad had done with the Quraysh? Well, a little give and take shouldn't upset them as M uhammad himself had said,

  'Verily ye are in an age when whoso omitteth one tenth of the law shall be doomed. But there will come an age when whoso fulfilleth one tenth of the law shall be saved."

 

‹ Prev