|
MUSLIMS AND MAINSTREAM
By Asghar Ali Engineer
Often question is raised by those with
communal bias and sometimes even by those with secular outlook whether
Muslims are part of Indian mainstream. Actually the word 'mainstream' is
also quite ambiguous and means different thing to different people. It is
used very loosely and never properly defined. First, it is necessary to
understand who constitutes the mainstream in the country? Also, who
belongs and who does not belong to the mainstream?
Is there any truth in the contention that Muslims refuse to be part of
Indian mainstream? This question can only be answered when we are able to
define Indian mainstream. It is alleged by the BJP leaders that Indian
Muslims are not prepared to show respect for the Hindu gods like Ram and
Krishna and are not prepared to assimilate Indian culture. As against this
they cite example of Indonesian Muslims. They say in Indonesia Muslims
have adopted Sanskrit names and Ramayana Dance as their national dance.
They have also Garuda as their national airlines.
This makes it clear that national mainstream is defined as Hindu
mainstream and Hindu mainstream it is also defined as Brahmanical
mainstream. Thus if any community does not fit into this Brahmanical
mainstream is thought not to be part of national mainstream. This
perspective suggests that all non-Brahminical streams are not national
mainstream. In fact democracy is nothing if it does not admit diversity
and plurality. No one can demand uniformity in democracy. Uniformity leads
to authoritarianism if not to fascism. Democratic unity is based on
diversity, not on uniformity.
No society is uniform, for that matter. Even the Hindu society is far from
being undiversified. Within Hindu society there is religious diversity
apart from cultural and linguistic diversity. Similarly, among Muslims
too, there is great deal of religious and cultural diversity. No community
is homogeneous. Homogeneous communities are mental constructs and not
reality. Some western scholars call it 'imagined communities'. Often it is
communalists who construct such homogeneous communities. Their purpose
cannot be fulfilled without mentally homogenising a community.
In Indian politics we always talk of 'Hindus' and 'Muslims' or 'Sikhs' and
'Christians', cite their numbers and draw our conclusions. We completely
ignore existing diversity and plurality of religious beliefs and cultures
within these communities. Also, politically too, these communities are
highly diversified and hardly take any united stand. Even on the question
of partition it is sheer myth that Muslims were one. Jinnah got maximum
support from upper class Muslims of U.P. From U.P. itself the lower class
Muslims like weavers and others were not in favour of partition plan and
had opposed it.
Moreover, we draw our conclusions about a community from our experiences
in urban areas. No wonder then that communalism tends to be urban
phenomenon. Most of the major communal riots have taken place in urban
areas though in late eighties they spread to rural areas also. But it was
more of an exception than a rule. In urban areas separate political
identities carry more weight than in rural areas. The reasons are not far
to seek. Urban people are more educated and articulate than rural people.
Urban areas are centers of politics, finance, business and employment.
Also, urban areas are far more competitive than rural areas. It is
competition in a highly diversified society which leads to conflict.
If we keep bewildering diversity of our country in view, national
mainstream will appear to be a theoretical construct rather than a reality
out there. The example of Indonesia is also of similar nature. It will not
be true to maintain that Muslims of all regions in Indonesia have same
culture. For example, Sanskritised culture is found in Java areas but not
in Sumatra as Java was under Hindu kings during medieval period. In
Indonesia too, there is great deal of religio-cultural diversity among
Muslims. It is interesting to note that in Bali where Hindus are in
majority and Muslims in minority, they (Muslims) feel threatened like
Pundits in Kashmir.
Indian Muslims are very much part of regional cultural streams. For
example, Muslims of Kerala are part of Malayalam cultural stream and in
that sense are closer to Kerala Hindus and Christians than Urdu speaking
Muslims of North. Same is true of Muslims of Tamil Nadu. They are much
closer to Tamil Hindus and Christians. Kerala Muslims or Tamil Muslims
have made seminal contribution to regional languages and cultures. Same is
true of Muslims in Gujrat. The Muslims of these regions are so well
integrated with regional cultures that they feel alienated in other
regions of India. This integration goes to such an extent in many cases
that one who does not belong to these regional cultures are not considered
Muslims. I myself had this experience when I visited a place near the
border of Kerala and Tamil Nadu. When I spoke to an elderly Muslim lady
through an interpreter, she was surprised that some one who does not know
Malayalam could be a Muslim. Her universe of Islam was limited to her
region and her language.
Similarly the Muslims of Assam are a category by themselves. They too are
much more integrated with Assamese culture and have their own local
customs. When I visited Assam during the height of students' movement in
early eighties I found Assamese Muslim intellectuals quite sympathetic
with the Assam movement. They were as much concerned with the Assamese
identity as others in Assam. Their identification with Assamese movement
would have been much more intense but for outbreak of communal violence in
Neili where more than 3000 Bengali Muslims were killed. Whenever degree of
communalisation increases, religious identity assumes more assertive role.
Conversely, if regional identity is more assertive, religious identity
will be less so.
In Kashmir too regional identity had been much stronger all through and
hence it did not see outbreak of communal riots between Hindus and
Muslims. Even during militancy regional solidarity often asserted itself.
Kashmiri Islam is basically a sufi Islam and Kashmiri Hinduism is a
Shaivite Hinduism. Both are monotheistic. Laleshwari, a Shaivite poetess
with a strong mystic rend in her religious outlook was quite close to
Rishi Nuruddin, a great sufi saint from Kashmir. Interestingly the sufi
saints are referred to as 'rishis' in Kashmir. The Kashmiri militants,
many of whom were outsiders (from Pakistan and Afghanistan) tried to
spread fundamentalist Islam but did not succeed. Generally the Kashmiri
Muslims are not antagonistic to Hinduism despite years of militancy.
However, for fear of extremists they may not be able to assert their
viewpoint. But privately they do admit that Pandits must return to valley
and many of them even have looked after their properties in their absence.
It is also wrong to say that Muslims refuse to respect Hindu gods like
Rama and Krishna. It amounts to saying that all Indian Muslims conform to
this behaviour. It is again homogenising entire Muslim community. At best
it is one trend among many. It is far from true that all Muslims refuse to
show respect to these eminent religious personalities of India. There are
thousands of Muslims who deeply revere them. Many examples can be cited.
The sufis of course had very different outlook from theologians. Mazhar
Jani Janan, an eminent eighteenth century sufi saint was of the view that
since Allah had promised in the holy Qur'an to send His prophets to all
the peoples of the world for religious guidance (For every people there is
religious guide) how could He forget Indian people. And since Indian
people highly revere Ram and Krishna, they must be His prophets. A
twentieth century Sufi Khwaja Hasan Nizami wrote a book on the subject and
showed that Ram and Krishna were prophets of Allah. Hasrat Mohani, a great
Urdu poet and a freedom fighter who gave a call for complete freedom in
1921 itself, rejecting the concept of Home Rule, was a great admirer of
Lord Krishna. He used to perform Haj every year and also visit Brinda Ban
on Janmashtami regularly. Some of the Farangi Mahli Ulama in Lucknow also
held Lord Krishna in great respect. Hasrat Mohani's wife who herself was a
freedom fighter like her husband was follower of one of these Farangi
Mahli order. Iqbal, the noted poet of Urdu described Ram as Imam-e-Hind,
i.e. revered religious leader of India.
The sufis had adopted local rituals and customs in order to assimilate
local culture and their Islam was highly Indianised and masses of Muslims
always followed these sufi saints rather than 'Ulama and their theological
pronouncements. Baba Farid who is buried in Pak Pattan in Punjab (now in
Pakistan) is considered to be founder of Punjabi poetry. He is greatly
revered by the Sikhs and his verses have been quoted in Adi Granth Sahib
along with other Indian saint poets. Khwaja Nizamuddin Awliya who is
buried in Delhi used to say that there are as many ways of worshiping God
as particles of sand. He used to listen to bhajans along with qawwali (sufi
music). Khwaja Hasan Nizami, who was keeper of Mausoleum of Nizamuddin
Awliya has vividly described in his book Fatimi Dawat-e-Islam how the sufi
saints adopted local rituals in order to popularise Islam.
The carrying of sandal on the death anniversary of sufi saints (called urs
or kurs in Tamil Nadu) and washing saints' graves are adoptation of Hindu
temple rituals. Similarly he describes many other similar Hindu rituals
adopted by Sufi saints. The followers of Imam Shah in Gujrat even went as
far as describing the holy Prophet as kal yug awtar of Krishna and his
son-in-law Ali as tenth awtar of Vishnu.
There are several sufi saints who are revered equally by Hindus as well as
Muslims. Their mausoleums are visited by great reverence by members of
both the communities. Many sociological studies of these mausoleums have
been done. The rituals of offering, vows, tying threads, exorcising evil
spirits etc. are rituals quite common to both the communities. Sometimes
the keepers of Sufi mausoleums are Hindus like at the Haji Malang Baba's
Mausoleum. Its keeper is a Brahmin.
Certain Muslim communities are highly Hinduised as for example the Meo
Muslims of Rajasthan and Haryana. Many anthropological studies of Meos
clearly show their Hindu customs and rituals. They celebrate Diwali and
Holi as they celebrate Eids. They do not marry within one Gotra like
Hindus of the North though Islam permits marriage with cousins.
Solemnisation of marriage among Meos is not complete without both nikah as
in Islam and circumambulation of fire as among Hindus of the north.
Similarly an anthropological study of life cycle rituals (i.e. rituals
performed from birth to death) among Bengali Muslims has shown striking
similarity between Hindus and Muslims. Even many purification movements
launched from time to time to rid Indian Islam of Indian influences have
never succeeded. The regional influences on Indian Muslims have become
integral part of their life. Thus one can say that it is folk religion
which is practiced by the masses than the scriptural religion. Scriptural
religion exists only in books. Can anybody still maintain the myth that
Indian Muslims refuse to assimilate elements of Indian culture?
Source: http://www.dawoodi-bohras.com
|
