Hindustan Times
Heal or harm, the choice is ours
In New Delhi’s Connaught Place commuter Metro station, millions cross a flashboard message fit enough to be our national anthem: “None of us is stronger than all of us”. This is rip-snorting good to be the collective mantra of all humanity as well.
Astounding, what comes about when the fuse-blowing adrenaline is put aside. Not with a counter-hormone from the drug store, but with some native good sense. Adrenaline is said to drive the “fight or flight reaction”, a physiological process the human body undergoes when confronted with mental or physical stress.
You must have seen it on the Discovery Channel or Animal Planet. How does a lion act when he goes crazy, such as when he sees a ready-to-eat meal of wild buffaloes? It is the predator’s adrenaline that powers its pounce on the prey.
Jinnah’s adrenaline rush was behind his call for “direct action day” or the Great Calcutta Riot on August 16, 1946. But it paled when the Mahatma walked barefooted through the blistering alleys of Bengal, but not before a wave of killings. The hormone was at work in Gujarat again, where the marauders could feel the adrenaline creep upwards from their extremities.
Enemies can be instantly eliminated when turned into friends. Today, we need a champion of communitarian unity because there is none. The Mahatma, the Band-aid for bleeding hearts, we no longer have the luxury of.
There are some islands still, where deference to one another’s ways is native and some men who could resist the adrenaline rush. On August 2, the Kerala chief of the Indian Union Muslim League, Panakkad Syed Muhammedali Shihab Thangal passed away. We lost one unflappable Muslim leader, who, when most of India convulsed with riots after the Babri mosque was razed, ordered that not a single Hindu be harmed.
I had met Thangal in Ajmer Sharif, sometime in 2007. Somebody let it slip that Thangal was resting at a friend’s house, not far from the dargah. Two words I remember he told me were important: middle path.
It is no secret that some bristling Hindus will continue to have a seething vision of Muslims. And some malevolent mullah will cringe at the very sight of every kafir (the Arabic word for unbeliever, not enemy).
Yet, there is a way to win this war on faith clashes, one that has to be fought unconventionally. Get frank, not fastidious. Talk honestly, not hectoringly. Admit faults, don’t hide them.
We have forgotten a magic word: compromise. Maybe, we need to borrow a fresh one form the Japanese dictionary: jui-jitsu, literally meaning the “art of softness,” or “way of yielding”, though Jui-jitsu popularly is a form of martial arts that involves a soft engagement of the enemy.
It is time to take one hard look. We need to start by asking some basic questions. So, we cannot stick together. Can we stay apart? Is it possible and can we consider this as an option?
Another Partition? For whom? Where? Let Muslims fall off the map again when we can never really keep apart even if we try? Can we break up children playing in the park or keep them from sharing school benches?
Thankfully, we have run out of all options. There is no option but to pull down the mental walls. No way out, other than to share the turf. Our menu has just one option: Unity. Take it or leave it. The toss-up is between two words: Heal and Harm. The choice is ours. And you tell me what to take.
Cadence is not the answer, true. Compromise is. Why is it so difficult, I do not understand. Don’t we make compromises at every step of our lives? We want bigger apartments, but settle for smaller ones. We aspire for BMWs and Mercs but settle for Marutis. We hope for chunky salary hikes, but make do with none. We gun for IITs and IIMs but when we cannot get through, we opt for less-reputed institutions. We would all like exotic holidays abroad but head for the nearest hill station instead. Why can’t we accommodate ourselves as Hindus and Muslims?
That’s because right-wingers always seem to be getting effective. They will not let the adrenaline levels to fall. One ominous call and Gujarat was burning. We know, in the case of Gujarat riots, Muslims started it, torching a train carrying advocates of a Ram temple in Ayodhya. But there’s always somebody who strikes first.
We are indeed a nation of notions. Here are some: Muslims are potential terrorists. The Quran preaches violence, so there can never be peace between Hindus and Muslims. Indian Muslims’ loyalties are suspect. They gloat in the victory of Pakistan in a cricket match. (How are Pakistani fans of Indian movie star Aishwarya Rai treated, I wonder.) All Muslims had better lived in Pakistan. A devout Hindu is obviously Muslim-unfriendly. Ad nauseum.
Let me keep things simple. These notions are clearly based on old pre-conceptions. When these pre-conceived notions are cleared up, we end up solving the problem. It is difficult to demonise someone you have met. Have you thought about this lately? That is why we should mix up.
Remember the anthem I started off this essay with? There is a corollary to that statement. It is this: none of us is smarter than all of us. In problem-solving, two minds are better than one. So, let us put our brains together and keep the adrenaline from going up.
(9 votes, average: 4.11 out of 5)
Loading ...
)
I can and do try to change the perception of my circle of friends, family and children.
(4.47 out of 5)
Altamash Reply:
August 31st, 2009 at 3:03 pm
Dear Akhilesh,
The same task u have done which u averse easy ‘the blame game’. After reading ur reply felt that how much anti muslim feeling u have doctrined. Brother the three questions ae no doubt very simple to answer but before that i’ll put the questions to u.
1. Why demolition of Babri mousque.
2. Mumbai riot’s sri krishna report has not been implemented yet even clearly finds the complicity of police.
[Reply]
J. A. Mansuri Reply:
August 31st, 2009 at 4:11 pm
Being an Indian National we are at present comfort living in secular state (bit torned), series of communal riots since 1947 till 2002 (Babri demolition). I represent Gujarat where all cities, villages, business, educational institutes (except National), news-paper, security agencies, Judiciary (unfortunate) are biased, suffering from Islamphobia. Besides ample good experience. I reside in Juhapura with minimal infrastructure facilities, health, hygeine, sports, garden, proper schools, no Girls / Buoy College, no Technical Institutes. Security agencies are obsessed with corruption. An educated Muslim Boy – irrespective he is religious or non-religious is castigated, i know case of a Psychiatric (NIMHANS product) Muslim boy frustrated for job-practicing future in Gujarat or India.
We Muslim do not believe on resources but in Almighty God, Who is Sole Dispenser of All Resources. Besides we experience lot of good experience from secular Hindu are still open minded and understand the chemistry of politics of fascist. Before 2001-Earthquate Hindu Muslim unity was fantastic. For politics it is BJP and Congress have polarized and tormented fabric of nation. Still many Indian want to live and coexist with differences. Muslims are improving on education. Similarly, we cannot compromise on Quranic injunction ordained by God, at the same time Ijtehad concept is a blissful in Islam, if we do not found any solution from Quran, Hadith, religious scholars could find out way in light of Holy Quran and Hadith that to permitted by Almighty God, who is Sole Benefactor of Humanity. Comfort and conveniency of definition in religion will lead no where.
[Reply]
Sam Reply:
August 31st, 2009 at 11:03 pm
I want muslims to condemn “Death upon leaving Islam” verses.
Can they condemn an 80yr old marrying 10yr old (as per Sharia according the 80yr old).
We dont care what your religion or texts say.
We do not want this stupidity.
It is up to you to interpret whatever you want, but the world is not going to tolerate such an unholy marriage alliance.
Can you pass a resolution, that in Pakistan a president can be Hindu ?
Until then, you just talk the talk, and just complain (without agreeing or realizing how bad things can be, if Hindus just follow what Muslims do in OIC).
You have to appreciate what you got, before complaining for ever.
If it was up to muslim politicians, you will not even have a secular country.
Just look at Afghanistan and Pakistan, what direction they went.
Thank the enlightened and secular Hindu politicians, who provide you an opportunity to even complain.
Ahmed Reply:
September 3rd, 2009 at 5:06 am
Sam- Are u Blind or biased or both ? U keep talking about Afghanistan Pakistan and what a handful groups are doing and ignore what the US UK and Israel are doing in Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan, Indonesia, and all other Muslim Countries at Govt level
That is the natural and minimum reaction u can expect from the people since the Govts of these countries have failed to protect the interests of people
I am afraid it may increase with more attacks on Muslim people around the world , latest being Iran
Sam Reply:
September 4th, 2009 at 4:28 am
What US/UK/Israel is doing in Iraq/Afghanistan,,
has nothing to do with
1. Apostasy laws in afghanistan (they are based on islam)
2. Why a hindu is banned from becoming president in Pakistan ?
3..
many many things.
These were on books because islam said so.
So what is stopping them from removing them ?
Is it islam or USA/Israel ?
Indian Reply:
September 1st, 2009 at 1:12 pm
Mr. Mansuri,
A few points.
Firstly, I appreciate the by and large positive tone in y our message and would like to reciprocate the sentiment.
Second – I want to point out a few distortions in your message.
- You mention that hindu muslim unity in gujarat before 2001 was fantastic. This is false. Gujarat has witnessed as many as 38-40 riots post independence. The biggest riots were in 1969 and 1985 with many other smaller riots. Both these riots lasted longer and had more deaths than 2002. You say the people in gujarat have islamophobia. Do you know that except 2002 in almost all riots more hindus have died in gujarat? Dont you know that most riots happened before babri masjid episode (and hence no bearing to it)? Do you know that per police records the muslims were one way or other responsible for starting most of the riots (as in 2002 too)? And finally during all these riots it was the congress which was in power and not the BJP and hence you cannot even ascribe a communal motive. Infact BjP/jansangh was not even a strong opposition? I do not mean to either denigrate islam or say that muslims are bad, but these are facts and obviously the hindus have a deep sense of hurt and distrust because frankly they have suffered much more in riots. For the first time after BJP came to power, the no. of riots reduced drastically and that was why the peace was there till 2001, only to be broken by the burning of the train. I am not even going to riots before 1947 because in those riots almost invariable only hindus died because muslims were the ruling class. You can check the records, since you live in ahmedabad. Dont you know how abdul latif was sheltered for 10 years by the muslims of dariapur? Dont you know that sohrabuddin was a driver of abdul latif and was accused in 50 criminal cases?
Second – you talk about juhapura. I agree that it is a backward area. You blame the current adminstration there or the hindus. But perhaps you have heard of cheetah camp in Mumbai. It is also a muslim dominated area and worse than juhapura. Lo and behold, it has a congress govt. for the last 10 years and indeed for bulk of the period post 1947. I do not think the govt. alone and hindus are responsible for either juhapura or cheetah camp. You need to look into reforming yourselves. You make a valid point that muslims are getting more educated and I think that and that alone is the real solution. Education will help solve a lot of the problems with the muslims and I hope for the best.
At the same time, I wish the mistrust reduces and discrimination also reduces and everyone lives as one.
Bobby Reply:
September 1st, 2009 at 1:54 pm
Dear Indian,
“Do you know that per police records…” This is very easy to explain. There is documented proof of police bias and complicity in for instance the mumbai riots. There are tapes which recorded the statements of the police acting in a bias manner against the minorities.
Secondly the congress is not the “epitome of secularism”. Elements of the Hindu Mahasabha has had influence over that party right from the pre-independence days. The only difference, though its a big and important difference, between the BJP and the Congress, is that the former is “ideologically communal”, while the latter is “ideologically opportunistic”…it becomes secular or communal depending on the circumstances.
“frankly they have suffered much more in riots…”
No sir, empirical data and logic both are against your argument.
Logic because, when every power structure- police power , political power , economic power, academic power, numerical superiority, is overwhelmingly in the hands of the “hindus”, its hard to believe that they could suffer more in riots,
and empirical data because every statistic of various human rights organizations as well as government findings show exactly the opposite.
Indian Reply:
September 1st, 2009 at 5:18 pm
Bobby,
Your logic has no logic. YOu somehow try to bring in logic and use fiction as a counter to facts. Please get real. Empirical and actual data is what I have provided, not some fiction you are giving. I will come to power structure in a minute. Until 1969 the hindus in gujarat have not even been known to retaliate and have invariable suffered hugely. You perhaps do not know enough about gujarat. Gujaratis hindus have never been really known for their fighting abilities. Infact most of them are supposed to be mild and tend to avoid physical confrontation. Also, there is a serious problem if you think that each and every police man has been communal for each of the 40 riots for all these years.
But to counter the point, riots in ahmedabad alone have been recorded in 1714, 1715, 1716, 1750, 1850, 1892, 1906, 1927, 1946. These are only some and not the exhaustive list. For most of the periods the ruling class was muslims, the daroga’s were muslims, the administration was muslims and at a later stage at senior levels the administrators were british. Even these have recorded cases similar to the post independence data. The above gives you enough statistics on power structure. Also, no meaningful human rights organization have recorded any substantive data pertaining to gujarat before 2002.
Some of the reasons recorded for communal riots – gulal got inadvertently spilled on muslims so they attached the hindu mohalla and destroyed temple property, the temple bells disturbed muslims offering namaz so they destroyed teh temple, a cow strayed into a moharram procession so they attacked the hindus and temples, etc. These are actual notings and not my assertions. Do remember that the power was with muslims and not hindus.
The least you can do is accept the truth and facts and then we can build an argument. I never told muslims are bad or inherently communal and I do not think that is the case and neither do I intend to draw that conclusion. But you try to counter anything and everything based on conjecture and that only creates fundamentalism.
Bobby Reply:
September 1st, 2009 at 7:51 pm
Dear Indian,
“I never told muslims are bad or inherently communal and I do not think that is the case and neither do I intend to draw that conclusion”
Firstly, I have not accused you of saying anything communal. I was simply countering your points.
Now coming back to your post, well I did not know you were talking of records of pre-independence India!!! I am talking of the present, not of 200 or 60 years back….
What I told you about were records in the case of the Mumbai riots and these are facts which have been well recorded. The actual statements of the police are taped and they shown a clear biased mind against the hindus.
But since we are talking of different things and eras I guess there is nothing to argue about!!
Indian Reply:
September 2nd, 2009 at 12:04 pm
Dear Bobby,
I am in full agreement that srikrishna report should be implemented. I am also of the contention that you should look at all riots (even if you choose to look only post independence, when 38 riots have taken place) and understand what I am trying to point. The specific instances prior to independence were to illustrate that power structure favoured the muslims, then and hence your contention on power structure and bias were completely misplaced. My points were specific to Mr.Mansuri’s statements and with reference to the sufferings of hindus in communal riots in gujarat. You keep talking about 2002 (which one should) but completely disregard all other riots. When you look at all the riots, you will see that in gujarat the hindus have suffered many more times in riots in gujarat. Please understand the context of the events and pyscology of the state. Please read again. Best luck.
Bobby Reply:
September 2nd, 2009 at 12:36 pm
Dear Indian,
Point taken. Thank you.
I have never claimed that Muslims are not capable of injustice. Depending on who has the power, its going to be misused, and therefore the attempt of all right meaning people should be oppose it.
Its not my claim that no injustice was ever done during Mughal period or pre-independence India, Its just that I simply choose to talk of present day problems, and all that I say is always in this context.
Akhilesh Reply:
August 31st, 2009 at 4:57 pm
Altamash,
I appreciate that you read my reply and have considered it important enough to post your own. And indeed equally appreciable is the fact that you have also posted some questions that trouble an average Mulsim.
Here is my response:
1. Babri Mosque: Well I am sure you are aware of the arguments on both sides of the divide. Let’s not get into it at the moment. But consider this. Was Babur an Indian or not? By any yardstick, he was not. He was an invader of India. Surely Akbar and all other Mughals were Indians as they were born here, raised here and assimilated in Indian culture. But Babur was not an Indian. He was an Afghani. Infact I don’t know whether you know or not, but he defeated Ibrahim Lodhi in Panipat in 1526. So indeed, he was not even a Muslim benefactor liberating India. For to capture India he massacared Mulsims themselves.
He was an out and out invader against India. Babri Masjid was less a mosque and more the tomb of an invading king. I am sure as a modern Indian, you would not like tombs and victory signs of invading murderers.
The way it was demolished can be questioned. In a society with rule of law, there should be ways to deal with issues. But in your hearts of heart, tell me Altamash, was that structure a mosque or a symbol of an invading victor. If you answer this question, you perhaps know the answer.
2. Shri Khrishna Report: Well I agree with you that it should be implemented immediately. But should so many other reports be. I bet there are 1000 of reports that are lying with govt gathering dust. Unfortuntaley thats how the government in India functions. But the trick is, not to make this issue a hostage to development on other fronts. Fir example, why should the development on Muslim Personal law be held hostage yo implementation of report.
Look forward to hearing from you. And no Altamwash, I am not indoctrinated against Muslims. Infact my family runs a boutique where we employ about 10 people, 8 of whom are Muslims !
Regards,
[Reply]
Bobby Reply:
August 31st, 2009 at 5:44 pm
Dear Akhilesh,
About the Babri Masjid issue, In my opinion, whether the mosque was built by an Invader or not is irrelevant to the issue. These are historical questions, and we should not be in the buisness of undoing history. The arguments you are giving could have been made pretty much for the victoria memorial and/or the gateway of India, clearly that is not a reason to destroy it right?
The second point about the lack of any relation between implementation of the Sri Krishna commission report and reforming Muslim personal law is well taken, and I would agree that there is no reason one should depend about the other.
But independent of the relation between the two, the fact still is that the Srikrishna commission report has not been implemented while the biggest goonda in Mumbai, Balasaheb Thakeray roams free even after openly issuing hate speeches (as well as interviews to foreign correspondents) which is clearly against the Indian laws. He gets away in the same way a mafia don gets away …simply issuing open threats that Mumbai will burn if he is arrested.
Sam Reply:
September 1st, 2009 at 7:56 pm
Hate speech is in my opinion
1. asking for Sharia
(where your version of hating woman is acceptable and you can create Pedophiles like an 80 yr old can marry 10yr old).
2. Hate speech is saying only Islam is the path and the country should not be secular
(look at what Pakistan is doing).
3. Hate speech is defending that “Hindu cannot be president in Pakistan” laws.
4. Hate speech is defending the “2woman witnesses = 1 man witnesses”
5. hate speech is saying “a man needs 4 wifes”
These ideas and religious based idealogies degrade a woman and deny human deceny and rights.
SKS Mumbai Reply:
September 2nd, 2009 at 7:35 am
Dear Sam,
You may not like this much, but I have to say that you are flogging too many wrong horses and too often.
What do you achieve by Indian Muslims
(a) demanding a Hindu president in Pakistan? Or in any other Muslim country?
(b) condemning 80yrs old marrying 10 year old, even if it happens in india, where you have laws that should address it?
(c) condemning 2 woman – 1 man principle or death for leaving , jizya on hindus and sikhs in Pakistan etc.
As far a I know, India is not governed by these rules and even Muslims are not asking for these. Your points would be valid if some people want these laws here and do so publicly and then you protest or demand condemnation.
Your concern for non-muslims in Islamic countries is fine but that won’t change just because Indian muslims condemn these practices.
Pretty much the same about history, what can present day muslims do about that? Well theoretically, you can question those who have a problem with Mr Modi while praising Aurangzeb, but that still does not take us anywhere. You can’t prosecute Aurangzeb today
I am not saying everything you say fits the above description but quite a few do and they are neither relevant nor actionable. Even after ignoring these, you have quite a few contemporary issues.
Of course I do acknowledge your right to brush aside these and continue with the same approach.
Sam Reply:
September 2nd, 2009 at 10:48 am
What is happening in Islamic countries, and neighboring countries like Afghanistan, Pakistan is a harbinger of future.
As much as you like to live in an isolated India, it is not going to happen.
Muslims get inspiration from what is happening in their “holy lands”, as it is their role model.
What happens “there” will likely be repeated sooner or later in India.
If people want to live like an ostrich that is fine.
If only the rulers of India, Persia had foresight before islamic marauders came knocking on their door, they could have avoided mass killing of Zoroastrians and Hindus..
All along in the history, indians did not look “outside” to know what is happening and it is too late by the time they realized.
I am looking into the future and warning what is going to come..
You cannot prosecute Aurangazeb today (even morally), as muslims do not condemn Jiziya.
They still believe it is God’s word, as per Koran.
If they even make a statement that what Aurangazeb did is against islam or wrong, that will help.
But do not count on that happening, if they do it they will be committing Blasphemy.
Sam Reply:
September 2nd, 2009 at 11:30 am
Protesters threaten bloodshed over Hindu temple
Dead cow’s head left in the front
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/index.php/malaysia/36272-protesters-
SKS Mumbai Reply:
September 2nd, 2009 at 10:30 pm
1. The use and importance of Jizya was smarter than we think. As we know any job involving maximisation or minimisation is always subject to constraints. “Smart” managers find ways which allow them to pursue their objectives while operating within the constraints. have a look:
“…. Greatest nobles of his Court represented to him that a large sum was realized and paid into the public treasury, and that if it were abolished, a great reduction in the income of the State would take place. The Emperor observed,
Anil Reply:
September 2nd, 2009 at 10:38 pm
Jizyah was a tool to sponsor the war efforts of islamic armies.. ocne they even resorted to putting jazayah on non-arb muslims when there were nto enough non-muslims around to fund the blood-thiorsty islamic army’s war efforts..
Umar II khalif abolished this practice of putting jazayah on non-arba muslims who they call mawali even today..and needless to say he was kileld by his own men for this abomination