Completed reading the book "The Great Theft" Wresting Islam from the Extremists by Khalid Abou Fadl said to be an Islamic scholar teaching in U.S. Universities. The part one is some history on the two strands of the Islamic theology, jurisprudence and law. The author makes out that in the Islamic world there were always a group of puritans and moderates. Both keep their faith in the revealed truth of Koran and Shariat. Both have enough to quote from these two in support of their contentions and practices. The author labors hard to get thru his message that puritan had hold of power and perks to propagate and convince the majority Muslim especially in the Islamic countries that under today's circumstances Muslim has to adopt extreme postures and measures to keep afloat the faith. They maintain that Muslims shall submit to god’s will and shouldn’t take decisions on their own. For 90/95 percent of the decisions are to be according to Koranic dictate only. The author finds that the puritanical versions of Islamic tenets are accepted by the people at large even though in the day to day affairs extreme Puritanism is not so visible. This shows that today's Muslim masses live a double life. How long this will go on? The author answered in a despondent mind that the future is not that optimistic. At several places the writings seem to be a heavily argued manifesto for moderation in religious matters and modernity in public affairs. The author being a devout believer, could not but defend and justify his position. The assumption that a religion is a necessity to keep moral & ethical life pure is not a new discovery in Islam. They were articulated by much more ancients for thousands of year before the appearance of the prophet. Then why a new religion? As per Koranic saying the first prophet was Moses. When people strayed out and thus corrupted the earth (not Middle East or Arabic lands) the next prophet arrived with a new religion i.e. Jesus. It was time for the next prophet and he discovered Islam. As per this concept Christianity appeared to redeem the world corrupted by Jews. Similar was the reason for the Islam to be born. Assumption here seems to be that before Christ the whole world was Jewish and prior to Islam the world was Christian. Both the assumptions historically incorrect and absurd. It also assumes that the entire world at that time consisted of a small patch of Eurasian last around Middle East. The vast populated part of the remaining world is not to be found in the whole revealed literature of these two people. And, the Jews, Christians as well as the Muslim claim that they are chosen by their gods to inherit everything on the earth. Such claims by themselves expose the sectarian and limited extend of these religions in historical setting. Of course Khalid A Fadl did not venture in this turf. A venture in that direction might derail the entire arguments in the book. The author explains the essence of being Muslim is that keeping faith to five or six tenets of Islamic practices. There is no need to establish the irrational and superstitious nature of those tenets. It is self confessed absurdity to say that Mecca & Medina are sacred and divine cities. If god is all pervasive there is no reason to claim one or two particular locations as sacred and the dictate to undertake pilgrimage at least once in life time for a Muslim. What happens to one who dies before undertaking the pilgrimage. Might be he will go to hell when the god comes on the day of judgement in a future date. There are many more absurdities in Islam just like in the cases all other religions of old and new. It all shows that religions not only divide people and also narrow their horizons. One cannot agree to a creed which proclaims that all people should follow a particular religion. When god himself has bestowed as many varied and claimed revelations to others than ones own. God wants peace but people fight each other to establish the superiority of their own. History is of full of strife between peoples of varied religious persuasions. At one place the author says that Koran is against war and subjugation of not only Muslims but others as well. Also he quoted Koran to support his contentions. If Fadl is correct then the community of Muslims owes a historic apology and renunciation of all conquest by Islamic rulers. They conquered with sword and death a vast territory where people were other than Muslims. If war is justified only in self defence against attack from others then at least people in India from 10th century onwards as victims of violent attacks might expect the present day successors of those earlier Muslims to express anguish and atonement thru renouncing those historical wrongs. Historians of every grain viewed the external invasion and subjugation of India not as religious one. But the Muslim genesis cannot be completely forgotten. The author of "Great Theft" should have rested these historical situations in his denouncing extremists as not true Muslims. Finally the author finds himself pessimistic for the future of Islamic religion under the influence and command of puritan driven extremists. He is not averse to see terrorism bringing nemesis to the good Islam.
The author of "Great Theft" in his concluding remarks calls upon all moderate Muslim to organise demonstration, shout slogans, issue pamphlets, posters, conduct meetings and debates on the un Islamic and anti Islamic face of terrorists using Islam to mask their reprehensible and wild activities thus isolating them among the masses.
By,
K.N:Krishnan.
Hindustan Times of to-day (14.3.2006) carried a very sensible and thought provoking article by Burkha Dutt of NDTV. She questioned the call by Vir Singhvi & others on moderates and secularist of all communities specifically on Muslim to mobilise and rally against terrorism.
The rhetoric headline is something unusual "what sort of loyalty test are we talking about here" gives an idea that there is demand for loyalty test on certain groups or communities. This is far from true. What is called for is action from all communities, to isolate the bigoted extremists from claiming any kind of representative character of any community. If L.K.Advani and his ilk deserve denunciation by all right thinking people so are the actions of the left, SP and like who mobilised mainly Muslims to protest against prophet cartoons under the convenient veil of anti imperialism. There were other columnist like Karan Thapar who expressed their complete dismay at the frenzy of the CPM and others to support divisive demonstrations. Does Ms Dutt believe that the anti bush demonstrations initiated but organised by a section of Muslim community and their violent denunciations of prophet cartoonists, all the west & specifically US has nothing to do with the dare devilry i.e. varanasi bomb blasts. The perpetrators found a perfect situation to act in provocation.
If responsible and secular parties instead of mobilizing their followers to confound the terrorists; have in fact mobilised mainly Muslims as if Muslims alone are anti imperialists. In demonstrations organised in Mumbai, UP & Hyderabad there was little against US imperialism and more on anti Muslim west & USA. The subsequent statements of CPM leadership e.g. Yechuri in HT last week did not dwell on the basic flaw in giving and upholding a platform for muslims fundamentalism with a mask of anti imperialism. Ms. Dutt should have taken serious note of Renuka Narayan's anguished sentiments. I don't view Renuka supporting or approving hindutva response to the Varanasi blasts. She was genuinely concerned about response of well meaning Hindus about terrorists acting in the name of religion without the community denouncing in loud voice. Denouncing terrorism should not be confined to just non Muslim secularists. It is not in term of loyalty test that 'moderate muslims' must speak, not just speak, they must shout, scream, holler, be heard so that there is no backlash." As in case of hindutva communalism when mainstream population come out to check mate, the Muslim community also should join the mainstream to denounce Muslim communalism. Communists failed but others should not.
New developments are taking in the Muslim community leadership. Media reported several clerics from different parts of the country issuing fatwas against terrorist attacks on temples and shrines as un-Islamic and against the tenets of Koran. This belies the apprehension expressed by Ms. Barkha Dutt earlier. I do hope that these fatwas are the first initiative on the road to join the mainstream anti communal forces in mobilizing all people of good will not just secularist or liberals. Believers in faith also should come out in streets and should and yell that they are on the side of sanity and against any kind of divisive activities that help & encourage communalism.
No comments:
Post a Comment