|
A
mantra for Indian Muslims
Make
it known that acts of medieval desecration that hurt fellow Hindus
hurts us as much
The
Prime Minister deserves to be applauded for the candour with which
he has spelt out his appraisal of Ayodhya, Kashmir and Pakistan.
It has been my belief that Hindu-Muslim, Srinagar-New Delhi, India-Pakistan
are actually one complex of issues. If you tinker with one of the
three equations, the impact will be felt on the other two. A government
that knows its mind can proceed on all three tracks simultaneously
but the script in hand has to be finely tuned. What is required
is a complete measure of the triangle.
For
example, any dialogue with the Kashmiri leadership will be easier
to conduct if there is harmony on the internal front. Front page
photographs of the ornate columns of the Ram temple in Ayodhya,
in an atmosphere of contention, would not make me feel very comfortable
were I to sit across the table with Kashmiri leaders (not the Hurriyat
alone) and give them my secular line. I am personally convinced
of the mantra I always recite: Indian secularism protects, among
a billion others, the world’s second largest Muslim population,
greater than the population of Pakistan, and all issues, including
Kashmir, must be addressed in a way that this fabric is not ruptured.
I shall always abide by this dictum because I know my country.
But
this conviction of mine is not shared by folks in Kashmir nor appreciated
by the ruling class in Pakistan. Even lurking fears of disharmony
in India will evoke different responses in the Valley and among
the Pakistani ruling elite. Kashmiris will flinch from a disharmonious
India; the Pakistani ruling elite will gloat over it.
And yet, the irony is that nobody who claims Indian civilisation
as his own can deny that a temple to Ram in the territory of Raja
Dasarath should be a matter of national celebration. Yes, that would
be the national sentiment, not just for the Hindus, but all Indians,
provided the air were not so charged with suspicion and confrontation.
Maryada Purushottam would have been pained that a memorial to him
should be so precariously placed in the vortex of divisive politics.
As
Mir Taqi Mir said, Dil dhaye ke jo kaaba banaya/ to kya kiya? (What
kind of Kaaba is it that its construction entails breaking of hearts?)
The
Prime Minister has put it elegantly: Medieval wrongs cannot be corrected
by contemporary folly. This statement might do with a degree of
elaboration. In medieval times all sorts of things happened. Somnath
was sacked by Muslim invaders for its wealth. Elsewhere, in Ayodhya,
Mathura and Kashi, Muslim rulers sought to subjugate their subjects
by imposing mosques on their places of worship. And it was not just
India that suffered this fate.
The
crusades were accompanied by cruelty and desecration. Likewise,
the Ottoman arrival in Anatolia brought in its train some of this
desecration. That Hindu rulers kept regular armies to loot the wealth
of temples does not help the argument one way or the other. The
fact is that was the medieval ethos, and Indian Muslims should not
be held accountable for ‘‘medieval follies’’.
But surely there is something that Indian Muslims can do?
We
must internalise the following truth and find ways to articulate
it: We are not responsible for medieval foolishness nor can we ever
be proud of anything that hurts our fellow human beings. ‘‘Drink
wine, set fire to religion if need be,’’ said Hafiz, ‘‘but
do not hurt a fellow human being.’’
Then
visit the three Hindu holy places in question, Ayodhya, Kashi and
Mathura. You will see that the mosques in the three places were
placed in a primarily Hindu ambience and could, particularly the
one in Kashi, hurt our Hindu friends. But to soften the hurt I can
place before my Hindu audience reams of poetry, by Muslim poets,
describing Ram as ‘‘Imam’’ of Hindustan, Kashi
as the Kaaba of Hindustan and Lord Krishna as an incarnation of
the Divine.
When
the Ottomans transformed the St Sophia Church in Constantinople,
all of Europe sat up. The great Mustafa Kemal Ataturk realised that
it would continue to hurt the Christian world next door. He discontinued
the mosque and made it into a museum. Alas, there is no Ataturk
around even to contemplate such steps. All I can suggest is to make
it known that any act of medieval desecration that hurts a fellow
Hindu hurts us quite as much.
The
Prime Minister has already announced the government’s resolve
to abide by the law. But the next step he recommends, that of negotiations,
is problematic because there is no Pope among Muslims or Hindus
who can negotiate on behalf of the major communities. All we can
do is to help bring down the communal temperature by simple sensitivity
to each other’s hurt. Is there, for instance, any real need
for that loud structure that has sprung up in the last decade which
obstructs the view of Hazrat Nizamuddin Aulia? I just want a good
Hindu to tell me that it is unfortunately located.
Only
when we are in perfect harmony at home can we proceed with confidence
on the other two diplomatic tracks. Anyone who creates disharmony
in the country is, without his knowing it, in cahoots with those
hardliners in Pakistan who gloat over our discomfiture.
|
