HT Home / Blogs Home >
They Call Me Muslim / Religion / Muslim moniker is sticky but I didn’t coin it
Muslim moniker is sticky but I didn’t coin it
Why “They Call Me Muslim”, I have often been asked. How about “They Call Me Indian” instead? What if someone were to write under a competing title, “They Call Me Hindu”?
At times, the query may have popped out of naivety, but mostly, there seems to be a question behind the question.I would answer by saying I don’t like to be called ‘Muslim’ all the time. But much to my chagrin, the general tendency has been to put me, and millions others like me, in that little box called ‘Muslim’ and shut it up. This is the reality today for Indian Muslims, French Muslims, Dutch, American, Israeli and even British Muslims. And it must be some crazy out-of-the-box thinking to box in Muslims this way across the world. Therefore, they call me Muslim.
It actually has to do with the syntax of the sentence and etymology of the word. ‘They call me Muslim’ as opposed to ‘they call me a Muslim’.
In the latter of the two formations, the word conducts itself with dignity and behaves like a humane adjective describing the community a person might belong to. It is like using ‘azure’ to describe the colour ‘blue’.
Ditch the ‘a’ midway, as in the former of the two formations, and you might end up getting a euphemism for a ‘potential terrorist’. Or someone whose ‘patriotism is suspect’. When used this way, the word could also simply mean ‘non-native’, ‘usurper’ or ‘inward-looking’.
Islamophobia is impossible without reverence to ultra-nationalism, as opposed to patriotism. A nationalist, therefore, should always go about with a patriot — they show each other off to the best advantage. Both may well use ‘Muslim’ negatively at some point or the other. Every tribe after all will have its failings. But there’s a difference. A patriot speaks the truth though it may give offence; an ultra-nationalist, in order that it may.
The rise of ultra-nationalism — at the expense for all that it stands for — has sparked a mistrust of Muslims not limited to religious cranks alone.
So, a Muslim’s sympathy for Palestine is a sign of putting religion before nation. This yoking together with violence of things meant to be separate is dangerous.
Why does an Indian Tamil sympathise with a Sri Lankan Tamil’s plight? Do we not lament the plight of minority Hindus in Pakistan? Explained purely in terms of human behaviour, such fraternal tugs are natural and legitimate. Therefore, they call me Muslim.
For any Muslim, Islam is a universal religion based on a set of global principles. Therefore, Muslims do not have to decide whether their religion has to be subsumed within their Indian ethos, or the other way around. So, putting religion before country or vice versa is an irrational argument.
Islam calls Muslims to universal brotherhood. This is how an egalitarian religion was founded.
The Prophet had said in his last sermon delivered on Mount of Mercy: “All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over black nor a black has any superiority over white except by piety and good action.” Click here
The sermon was delivered in 632 AC. By that time, nearly the whole of Arabia was Muslim. Therefore, the inference is clear. A Muslim, devoid of scruples, is not superior to a non-Muslim.
In the Muslim tradition, it is often said “you must respect the contract”. So, a deeper understanding of Islam will only unveil a Muslim’s obligation to be a deeply committed citizen wherever he/she lives. The concept of universal Muslim brotherhood is not a substitute for Muslim nationalism. There is nothing like Muslim nationalism in the first place. It has no religious grounding. It’s not possible to have such a thing, given the way politics within Islam has unfolded.
Had there been such a thing called Muslim nationalism, Sunnis would not have contested Shias on principles of faith. And there would have been a uniform model of governance rooted in Shariah-complaint theocracies. There would not have been one type of government in Lebanon and another type of petromonarchy in Saudi Arabia or Jordan. There would not have been a dictatorial regime in Iraq, while having a theocracy-backed democratic government in Iran at the same time.
It is high time we emphasized that Muslims do not have a nation but nations; not identity but identities; not culture but cultures. A French Muslim and an Indian Muslim could not have been more dissimilar than they now are.
It is the ultra-nationalist’s mix-up of universal brotherhood with non-existent Muslim nationalism that is responsible for such aberrations. Therefore, they call me Muslim.
Muslim-perpetrated terror is a reality and the vast majority of Muslims condemn it. They condemn it in Europe, in UK and here in India, too.
According to a Pew poll, the concern that Islamic extremism poses a major national threat is strongest in Morocco, the site of a devastating terrorist attack two years ago, where nearly three-quarters of the public (73%) hold that view.
A Gallup polling over six years and three continents, a sample equivalent to 90% of the world’s Muslims, showed that widespread religiosity “does not translate into widespread support for terrorism”. So it’s time we asked this: should we be at war with terror or should we be at war with Muslims?
We as Muslims must learn to argue off perceptions based on this dangerous method of ‘Googling Islam’. If you want to talk about Islam, you’re welcome. But then you must find better methods of studying the religion and its followers.
There is a propensity to transform abhorrent perceptions about a potent radical minority into a mainstream Muslim movement. Regardless of their potency and ability to cause death and destruction, the guilt of a few Muslims cannot be transferred to the vast majority of Muslims committed to the two Ls — lawful and loyal.
Native versus non-natives is a racist tendency. One only has to look at escalating attacks on Indians in Australia? So, the racist exclusion agenda calls for a global non-violent resistance. Whether you are an immigrant or indigenous is a question of time really. Therefore, “They Call Me Muslim”.
(21 votes, average: 4 out of 5)
Loading ...
(4.47 out of 5)
Indian Reply:
January 18th, 2010 at 12:48 pm
Well there are no foreign fighters in Kashmir, almost all are kashmiris from India pr Pakistan side, unless you consider **** kashmiris as foreigners…..I agree there are few mercenaries!!! Foreigner thins is Indian army figment!!! for crazy “nationalist” like u!!
And in Uighur i wud say, the Chinese are more foreign in that land cos they have colonized that area in similar way Chinese are foreign in Tibet and colonized it!!!
similar logic goes to Chechenya!!!! where the foreign fighters are the occupiers and not these small fighters!!!
[Reply]
S Singh Reply:
January 18th, 2010 at 4:59 pm
Indian
We do not see Tibetans exploding with suicide bombs. We do not see other Budhists traveling to Tibet. We do not see Budhists exploding subways and airports to liberate Tibet.
Now in Malaysisa, Muslims are destroying Churches because of the ruling that Christians can call their God Allah. Is “Allah” patented? Why cannot anybody call their God anything they want?
Muslims, a large number, if not a majority, do not subscribe to the theory of nation-state; and care on;ly about their “nation” – Ummah. And this is creating a big backlash all over, especially in liberal Western countries with questions on the twisted and dangerous loyalty of Muslims.
[Reply]
Indian Reply:
January 19th, 2010 at 9:25 am
we too don’t see Uighur exploding in china….we too don’t see kashmiris exploding in India…..We do see some entity called Al Qaeda created by CIA, or Huji, IM creation of RAW exploding from time to time through their sleeper cells!!!!
Rajeev Reply:
January 21st, 2010 at 1:02 am
There you go…Conspiracy againts Islam …These guys are full of it.
sanjeev Reply:
January 18th, 2010 at 11:12 pm
@ Indian
“Foreigner thins is Indian army figment!!! for crazy “nationalist” like u!! ”
What about kashmiri pandits ?
Are they not kashmiri ?
If indian army is foreigner in kashmir, to me you and your ilk like Zia are more aliens in india. Ask your forefather who voted enthusiastically for muslim homeland in 1946 elections. Let me remind 89.6 percent muslims voted for muslim league, whose sole agenda in those elections was pakistan. Still you parasites remained to suck the blood for india.
[Reply]
Indian Reply:
January 19th, 2010 at 9:22 am
Kashmiri pandits are very much welcome in Kashmir valley as said by kashmiri leaders from time to time, but to aggravate the matter to strengthen their cause RSS and rightist dont wnat them to return……..otherwise people like u will have no issue to talk about…………U rightwinger hindus want to make kashmir a communal and religious issue rather than geopolitical issue……..therefore you want to demarcate clear cut lines between Kashmiris Hindus and Muslims.. Not one but many times Kashmiris Muslims said that demand for their homeland or whatever is incomplete without their hindu brethren. But the problem lies here that Kashmiri pandits have more affinity towards their hindu brothers than kashmiris concept. KPs dont give damn about kashmirismuslims killings and death cos they have more “closeness” to hindu brothers!!!! For Kashmiri pandits the religion is more important their Kashmiri identity…….Look still many sikhs are living in valley!!!!whyyyyyyyyyyyyy
U blind RSS guy look from some other perspective………………..
Indian Reply:
January 19th, 2010 at 9:27 am
During Ram lahar Majority community from India to enthusiastically voted for Right winger Hindus…….but later they never got that percentage…………..so why the hell u r quoting some election in 1946………r u in frozen time or what…………time changes!!!
sanjeev Reply:
January 19th, 2010 at 1:05 pm
@ indian
Hope you understand the difference between voying for a party with separatist agenda, contesting elections only on the plank of sepaarte homeland, participating wholeheartedly in its direct action day (16 july 1946 ) when 10000 hindus were killed in a day in calcutta under the leadership of Jinnah.
I hope u understand difference between opting for one party for another in democratic India. Political parties keep coming and going out in power.
BTW your comparision of BJP with 1946 is off the mark.
ta Reply:
February 22nd, 2010 at 1:40 am
@rajeev
In the twilight of the Cold War, the United States spent millions of dollars to supply Afghan schoolchildren with textbooks filled with violent images and militant Islamic teachings, part of covert attempts to spur resistance to the Soviet occupation.
The primers, which were filled with talk of jihad and featured drawings of guns, bullets, soldiers and mines, have served since then as the Afghan school system’s core curriculum. Even the Taliban used the American-produced books, though the radical movement scratched out human faces in keeping with its strict fundamentalist code.
As Afghan schools reopen today, the United States is back in the business of providing schoolbooks. But now it is wrestling with the unintended consequences of its successful strategy of stirring Islamic fervor to fight communism. What seemed like a good idea in the context of the Cold War is being criticized by humanitarian workers as a crude tool that steeped a generation in violence.
Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A5339-2002Mar22?language=printer
I am not quoting AlJazeera Will you agree now that Al-Qaeda is the creation of the CIA and the US is not figting a war on terror against Islam, they are only fighting a nemesis, they had once upon a time, created when it suited them?
SKS Mumbai Reply:
January 19th, 2010 at 2:03 pm
Oh yeah
There are no foreign fighters in Kashmir.
Mangalore is Frankfurt, Bangaore is Glasgow
Istanbul is Assam
Argentina is Iraq
Kashmiri Terrorist Movement is not a communal and religious issue rather a geopolitical issue.
Correct. Nijam-e-Mustafa is Geopolitics.
Same as Agriculture means Culture.
Law Mean Qawwali
“Not one but many times Kashmiris Muslims said that demand for their homeland or whatever is incomplete without their hindu brethren”
Yes Of course, (BTW could it be because Kashmiri Pundits took their daughters also with them? You must be aware of the original Self Respect Slogan of Kasmiri Muslims painted over the houses of Kashmiri Pundits) Under Nijam-e-Mustafa, even George Bush would be welcome by Kashmiri Muslims.
At the end of the day “Sovereignty over the entire universe belongs to Almighty Allah alone”
[Reply]