Chapter 1
Religious Conversion and Touchstone of Nationalism
Advent of Islam
But the tables were turned with the advent of Islam. It marked an end of unity, humanity, culture and nationalism. Freedom of worship, religious unity, local deiities and religious rites and capacity to think were all sacrificed on the altar of Islamic brotherhood. Forcible religious conversion, that too under the threat of the sword, rocked the nation. Refusal to accept Islam resulted in the massacre of people, destruction of temples and shrines, in burning of libraries, rape of women and sale of enslaved men belonging to the conquered society, in looting of property of non-Muslims and in encasing children in walls. These were done in the name of Islam to "please" God.
Wherever Islam spread in the world these acts of destruction took place. After all what is there in Islam ?
Islam Divides the World
Islamic social science divides the world in two parts.
1. Darul Harb: The nation of infidals (kafirs), area of war, is that place where people have not yet accepted Islam.
2. Darul Islam: Meaning that nation where people have adopted Islam. To convert the entire world into Darul Islam (area of peace) is the declared aim of Islam. Instructions have been issued for carrying out relentless struggle for achieving the establishment of the Islamic rule wherever it has not been set up yet. It means that Muslims living in non-Muslim countries will not settle in peace by cooperating with the local basic society, its culture and traditions. They will remain active in their search for establishing Darul Islam. The basic tenets of Islam do not accept any other religion. Therefore, it is considered religious to annex non-Muslim countries and then join them in the "Milat" (Muslim world).
Islam, either Death or Tax
Islam has created yet another religious division in the world - faithful (those who have faith in the Book) and faithless (those who have no faith in the Book). Christians and the Jews have been placed in the first group. Those who belonged to this group were given the right to live after paying the tax. But those who belonged to the other group (faithless) were given only two options - adoption of Islam or death.
It was necessary for non-Muslims in Egypt to wear a glass insignia round their neck after paying the tax so that it could be known that they had not accepted Islam yet. For the first time in India Feroz Shah Tuglak imposed tax on Brahmins. Thus there were two laws in the same country and at the same time, Islamic and non-Islamic. An example of this ignoble and shameless affair was witnessed during the time of Sikander, an iconoclast, when he prohibited Hindus to ride horses, wear clothes and possess arms like the Muslims.
Jehad (Religious War)
The concept of Jehad (armed struggle) is an essential part of Islam. Encouragement for struggle and fight against nonMuslims for the protection of Islam remain its aim. And the slogan like "Islam is in danger, be ready for Jehad" reverberate whenever Muslims face any political, social or geographical problem in any corner of the world. Recently Saddam Hussain of Iraq raised the slogan of Jehad against the United States in the Gulf war when he knew it well that four Muslim countries were in the battlefield against him (Saddam).
If Darul Islam (area of peace) and Jehad (call for sacrifice) are limited to the area of pure religious affairs, they can prove beneficial for humanity. But these expressions lose their sanctity when they are used as political weapons. Side by side the concept of Darul Harb (area of struggle) gives birth to religious fanaticism and destroys the sanctity of "Darul Islam" and Jehad.
A former President of India, Dr. S. Radhakrishnan, also a renowned philosopher, had carried out a detailed study of Islam. In his book "Ancient Religion and Western Thought" he has given brief but comprehensive definition of Islam. According to him Hindu religion is a uniting force which took centuries to understand and realise it. The religion of Islam is only a product of brain which has been expressed in one sentence - "God is one and Mohammad is His prophet." Prophet Mohammad claims that the chain from Adam to Noah to Moses and to Jesus is its last ring. The ideology of Prophet Mohammad is simple. It supports brotherhood and expresses hatred for idol worship. In the implementation of its principles Islam has left only two options either adopt Islam or accept surrender before Islam. Before his death Prophet Mohammad had become master of Arab and had started invading his neighbour.
Dr. Radhakrishnan has said that history is a witness to the fact that Prohphet Mohammad's followers followed their Prophet's footsteps and continued the trend of invasions. In the Middle period these invasions had three segments - 1. Caliphs, 2. Islamic Chieftain, 3. Mulla. With the blessings of Mullas the Muslim Army would first occupy any area and later under the shadow of their swords Mullas and Molvis would teach "Kalima" to the residents of those areas. This trend continued till there was peoples' awakening against such religious wars and Jehads. But by the time this materialised the work of conversion had dyed in Islamic green western and central Asia, north and central Africa and south-east region of Europe. And Islam established its foothold in some areas from India to Indonesia, from Philippines to China. For a long period Muslim Chieftains and Mulla, Molvis played a lead role in completing the process. After conquering any area the chieftain would present the residents of that area before a Mulla for effecting their religious conversion. Following their baptism to Islam the Mulla would make them obedient people of the Chieftain and the Chieftain would try to install local sardars. By and large this story has been repeated till date in many influential countries.
Sacred feeling of brotherhood and extreme fanaticism
There should be no objection in accepting that as per the God's plan, messengers of God, prophets and Lords are born, from time to time, for the betterment of the world. Those who have no faith in the power of God could interpret the same in a different way; some influential leader among the people tries to improve the deteriorating condition of the people, alleviate their difficulties and administer justice to them. This section of the people falls in the category of greatmen and prophets. Thus Prophet Mohammad too was a saint and a greatman who took the responsibility of preaching brotherhood in the world. He had been sent by God to the world as a prophet. He sacrificed everything for ending the evils of disputes, conflicts among the rulers, oppression of people by the rulers, communalism and idol worship in the world. He deserves honour for this work. It is a duty of all civilised people to bow their head before such a greatman, salute him.
But the Prophet's followers and supporters gave a political veneer to his teachings and message regarding humanity, amity and Islamic brotherhood. This was done to set up Islamic empire for which the bloodshed was not even remotely connected with humanity and civilisation. The pages of the holy Koran are full of the duties of humanity and humanism. But the followers of Prophet Mohammad failed to see those verses in the holy Koran which carry the message on human brotherhood, help to the poor, assistance to the helpless, improving the lot of the exploited, equal rights for all and the spiritual value of Namaz. They saw only those pages of the holy Koran which would satiate their imperialistic desires through which they could quench their thirst for wars. They saw only those pages which would lend religious legitimacy to their barbaric tendencies and through which they would derive strength for their ego, passion and greed for power. Everyone has a different style of understanding and interpreting scriptures. The righteous and the wicked imbibe the spirit of these scriptures according to their mental capacity. The righteous see virtue everywhere and the wicked always sees the vice. Prof. Balraj Madhok has written on page 190 of his book "Hindu Rajya" that for understanding the Muslim mind and its intolerance towards other religions it is necessary to understand those Koranic verses which give direction to the Muslims regarding their behaviour with other people.
Sura (chapter)
8 Verse 12
Terrorise
the mind of infidals (kafirs), Behead them and break their limbs.
Sura (chapter)
8 Verse 37
Fight them
so long idol worship does not end and Allah's religion not loved by all.
Sura (chapter)
9 Verse 4
When the holy
month ends, gherao (surround) the idol worshippers, wherever found, and
attack them.
(from translation of 315, 317, 321 pages of Koran by N. J. Dawood)
Under these very instructions they killed Guru Teg Bahadur. Guru Arjun Dev was burnt alive to death when hot sand was thrown on him. Sambhaji's limbs were cut into pieces and in our lifetime Swami Shradanand and other lakhs of Hindus and Sikhs were massacred. Despite these facts it would be like living in a fool's paradise and an indication of lack of understanding of the Muslim mind if it is believed that today's Muslim generation is different from its ancestors. Muslims have religiously followed the above mentioned directions. And we have been, according to Prof. Madhok, behaving like the proverbial monkey "do not see evil, do not hear the evil, do not speak ill".
Prof Madhok in the same book says that Islam is not a religion but a political strength because its activities are not limited only to the worship of God. Its aim is to grab political power and to establish Islamic state. Beyond it Islam does not believe in the co-existence with people of different faiths. It cannot be expected of any true Muslim to be loyal to any non- Muslim nation. They have been told to fight till they establish an Islamic state.
Mr. B.N. Jog has the same thing to say on page 51 of his book "Hindu-Muslim Unity." According to him the Koran has said that he who is not a Muslim is an infidal (kafir). How to deal with these infidals ? Koran has made a mention of it in clear and measured words.
"Kill an infidel
wherever he is found. Evil practices and miseries spread because of them.
It is better to kill them than have anarchy. Therefore, kill kafirs, but
those who supplicate and seek protection and pledge to obey the dictates
of Allah be spared. Do not have enemity with them. Fight infidals around
you. Let them understand how merciless you are. And keep it in mind that
those who fear God and obey Him Allah resides in them."
(Koran, Sura
9, Verse 25)
He quotes Koran
and writes: Those who are diseased, thereby meaning who do not accept Allah,
are the reason for the spread of faithlessness everywhere. But God wants
to punish them through you. You have to keep the fight against them. They
are to be killed. Fighting them may not be interesting still you have to
fight. It can be that anything that does not interest you may be beneficial
for you. Contrary to this, you may wish for something, or you may be in
possession of something which may not be beneficial for you. You cannot
understand it. Whatever is good or bad for you, only Allah can know it.
(Thus kill
them as you have been directed)
(Koran: Sura
33 Verse 60 to 65)
"Punish the
kafirs. Kill them. First tell them to adopt Islam, if they do not accept
Islam, kill them. Slay them wherever they are found."
(Koran: Sura
4 Verse 90 to 95)
"Slay them
or sell them as slaves."
(Koran: Chapter
5, Verse 30 to 35)
Such directions
from the Koran are dreadful. At that stage victorious Khans or Sultans
would implement these orders as per their strength and mental capacity.
The Koran carries a dictate which says that he who, after conversion, has
become a Muslim too could be dubbed as a fraud and punished. Muslims were
told to show no mercy to those who excel in deceit and later will say they
have faith in Islam. Do not show compassion even if he says he has faith
in Islam but there is nothing like this in his mind. How can you show mercy
to them if Allah wants to punish them ? Their fall in the world is certain
if God is not willing to purge them. It is also certain that they will
be punished in heaven.
(Koran Chapter
5,Verse 35 to 40)
While expressing complete faith in the holy Koran I wish to request Muslim scholars that they should convey their views on these verses to Mr. Balraj Madhok, (394-J, New Rajender Nagar, New Delhi) and to Mr. B.N. Jog, Lokhit Prakashan, Rajender Nagar, East, Lucknow so that confusion and doubts in opinion are removed.
Nation's Place in the Context of Islamic Brotherhood
In the concept of Darul Islam (era of peace) and Islamic brotherhood there could be no room for country and nation. Nation and society are small in front of the Islamic world. Love and loyalty to any one country is an obstacle in the goal of Islamic brotherhood. Removing it or its removal is necessary. The ideas and expressions like obedience towards the motherland, patriotism and national deity are considered idol worship as per the Islamic thought. And idol worshipper is an infidal (kafir). Thus without the elimination of infidals there can be no Darul Islam (region of peace). That is why nationalism and patriotism lag behind and religion marches ahead. This is the reason that those who get converted to Islam do not take time in changing their loyalty to the nation they belonged to. Their outlook, their faith, their ancestral culture, tradition, style of linng and even their names change.
Mohd. Arif Beg has written on page 25 of his book "Muslim Dilemma in India" that as per the principle, Muslims should have no nation of their's; they campensate this deficiency through community feeling. This special feature does not allow them to adjust with the life and living in non-Muslim countries and does not allow a devoted Muslim to become a cosmopolitan, nor a nationalist nor a humanitarian. Islam makes Muslims communalists who can experience fellow feeling in only Muslim majority countries.
Believers of Islam have ruled areas from Spain to Albania and from Atlantic ocean to the Pacific ocean. But they never recognised the ancestors, their culture and their socio-religious traditions in any of these countries. Kaba was the sacred place for Muslims of this entire region. Islamic brotherhood was the field of action and the holy Koran the field of thought. There was no place for other ideas and opinions in this strictly disciplined unity. More surprising than it was the way the converted people in these countries got delinked from the religion of their origin, culture and nationalism. This activity is still on.
"Kuwait Times" is a famous newspaper in the gulf countries. In its edition of September 6, 1973 a news item, under the caption "Raid on Idol" gives an account of the behaviour and policies of the Government towards different religious doctrines. Mr. Jog in his book "Hindu-Muslim Unity" has made a reference to it. He has written that the newspaper wrote that "there is danger of rise in the interest in idol worship because of the display of idols of Hindu deities in number of shops in Dubai. In this connection Dubai Municipal Council will carry out the probe. The Government has issued orders under which idols of Hindu deities will be seized and those Hindus who will violate the prohibition on preaching Hindu religion and sale of idols were to be jailed besides paying fines".
The above mentioned instance should make it clear that there is no room for basic ideas and concepts of democracy, nationalism and secularism in Islamic and Muslim states. Attempts are being made to finish such ideals and conventions in these countries. Mohd. Arif Beg writes clearly on page 11 of his book "Muslim Dilemma in India" that despite these contradictions final analysis reveals that neither the Koran nor Prophet Mohammad advocate humanity nor encourage it. In this situation it is natural to feel that Islam was born to end all other religions. This cannot make supporters of Islam likeable in India and in any other country where they are in minority. This also makes it clear as to why there is no secular constitution in any Muslim majority country and why a devoted Muslim cannot become a nationalist.
Who is Guilty ?
Nobody laid emphasis on the need for linking afresh the Muslim society in India with the culture and nationalism of its ancestors. Rulers exploited them as "vote banks" and allowed them to remain separate from the national mainstream by recognising their different political existence. Rulers treated them "votes" but not "citizens". This politics of self-interest prevented Muslims from being nationalists. If anyone tried to explain and make them understand patriotism and nationalism he was dubbed as a communalist. Sardar Patel, Purshotam Das Tandon, Acharya Kriplani, Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia, Deendayal Upadhyay, M.S. Golewalker, Balasahab Deoras, L. K Advani, everyone of them, have been bracketted in this group. The Congress rulers, in particular, neither thought of the welfare of Muslims nor allowed anyone to do so.
The misfortune of the Indian Muslims has been that their leadership remained in the hands of Mullas and Molvis. Strong, solid, liberal and nationalist Muslim leadership could not emerge. Whenever some patriotic and nationalist, educated Muslim scholars were seen emerging on the horizon they were declared degenerated enemies of Islam and infidals (kafirs) by the Mullas and the Molvis. Maulana Azad, Dr. Zakir Hussain, M.C. Chagla, Ham-id-Dehlvi, Arif Beg and Muzaffar Hussain like nationalists were never supported by the Mullas and Molvis. When Maulana Azad became the Union Minister for Education he was dubbed as a stooge of the Hindus by the Muslim world. A Muslim poet dedicated a couplet to him:
tere buland
manasif kee khair ho yarab,
jis ke liye
kiya toone khud hee ko halaal
(you sacrificed your soul for your aggrandisement, greetings to you)
When Dr. Zakir Hussain became the first Muslim President of India the situation took a strange turn. He was a philosopher and poet. He expressed the sentiments of both Hindus and Muslims as below:
Jahide tang
nazar ney mujhe kaafir jaanaa,
aur kaafir
samajta hai musalmaan hoon mein.
The co-existence of nationalism and brotherhood and mutual distance can be presented through an interesting example.
Mohd. Iqbal was considered a scholar of Urdu and Islam. He was a great poet. In the beginning he wrote many poems on nationalism. He wrote a poem on India:
saare jahaan
se achha hindustan hamaara,
hum bulbulein
hein iskey yeh gulistan hamara ....
This type of poem Mohd. Iqbal wrote and took pride in the culture of India. India's culture was described as immortal and declared India as his country. He wrote poems on Himalayan mountains and rivers of India. While treating Lord Rama a greatman he wrote a poem:
is desh mein
huey hain hazaaron maalik sarisht,
mashhoor jinke
dum sey duniya mein naam-e-hind.
hai raam key
wajood par hindustan ko naaz,
ahle nazar
samajte hein unko imaame hind.
Iqbal changed his mood and attitude when Mullas and Molvis together raised objections against such poems and when the Khilafat Movement was at its peak. He wrote one more poem under the title "Tarana-i-Milat". He wrote:
muslim hein
hum, watan hai saaraa jahaan hamaara,
hindustan
hamaaraa, chino-arab hamaaraa.
tegon key
saaye mein hum palkar jawaan hue hain,
khanjar hilaal
kaa hai komee nishaan hamaaraa.
From "we are Hindis, Hindustan is our land" it became "we are Muslims, the entire world is our land". The entire dealings changed. When the question of choosing between religion and nation arose Iqbal held the apron of religion and sidelined the nation. Vir Sarvarkar had described it "from religious conversion to change in loyalty to nation".
Indian Muslims are also Children of Mother India
There are many sects and beliefs in India. All, while worshipping God through different ways, have maintained their religious identity. Parsis, Jews etc. while enjoying freedom have preserved their identity. People of India have welcomed and honoured everyone. The author of "Oxford History of India," Vincet Smith has given a thought-provoking and lovely description of the broad and liberal side of the Indian culture.
According to him there exists, in India, a deep spiritual unity which is deeper than the unity that is the result of geographical unity and political greatness. This unity has been forged after crossing the multi-dimensional facet of blood, colour, language, style of living, traditions and faiths. This prominent and basic unity is the result of the fact that in India different type of people gave birth to a peculiar civilisation and culture which are totally different from the one that exist in the world.
In an interview Mr. M.S. Golewalker had told Dr. Saifuddin Jeelani "Is it not strange that the Indisn Muslims adopt the names from the Arabian history, do not hesitate owning historical figures of Iran like Rustam and Sohrab, adopt the names of greatmen of Turkey but maintain hatred against names of their Indian ancestors including Ram, Krishan, Chandragupt, Samudragupt and Vikramaditya?" After all Indonesia is also a big Muslim country but there the Muslims have not severed their links with their historical traditions, culture and language. Even being Muslims they have names like Sukaran and Ratana Devi. Their airlines is named as "Garud" corsidered to be Lord Vishnu's chariot. "Haven't they remained Muslims by doing so?" According to Golewalker if the Indian Muslims try to understand thoroughly and deeply the teachings of Prophet Mohammad in their historical perspective, they will not become only his true followers but also good nationalists and great Indians.
Different flowers can bloom in the sprawling garden of Indian culture. Under its greatness different opinions, sects, faiths can co-exist. All these can protect their identity while linking themselves with Indian nationalism. "If it is so, what is then the danger in linking Islam with Indian nationalism?"
It is worth remembering those words of Mr. Arif Beg which he has written on page one of his book "Muslim Dilemma in India". According to him the conflict among the Muslims is that whether it is good for the Indian Muslims to lose their identity by merging with the people in India or they are bound by Islam to maintain their separate existence and keep on tolerating the physical, mental, social and economic consequences which are the result of separatism. Muslims have to decide whether they belong to that Muslim society which is a branch of Indian Muslims whose heart is in West Asia, or they are Indian Muslims of the Indian gociety whose roots are in the soil of India?
The answer to this question can be found in the words of the RSS leader, Mr. M.S. Golewalker who has said that "uniformity is a signal of destruction for a nation. Nature does not accept uniformity. I support different ways of life. Still care should be taken that these diversities should assist national unity and not create hurdles in the way of unity of nation".
When two brothers separate, what get divided are shops, house, ornaments, land etc., but not the division of parents. Ancestors do not change. The brother who has separated does not search for a new father. Similarly when the way of worship changes, what will then change ? Place of worship, way of worship and deity of worship change but ancestry, national great figures, national culture, history, ancient centres of national pride and nationality do not alter. If culture, history, ancestry and blood are one, why then there is difference in faith in country and nation? When all religions are different ways of worshipping the only God, then why religious conversion ? And why change in loyalty to the nation after religious conversion ?
|
|
|
|
© 2001 Kashmir Information Network. All Rights Reserved.