|
|
17. Why should the Muslims Survive at Somebody’s Mercy, Dr.
Vedpratap Vedik,
Hindustan Times, 25
March 2002
Had not the
Gujarat taken place, nobody would have perhaps bothered to take
cognisance of the resolution of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. Neither
would the media have blown it up nor would have the rebuff been there.
An ordinary sting of a honey bee is proving more damaging than thousand
shake bites only because the writings are adoring the bloody walls of
Gujarat. What
the resolution of the Sangh says is that the protection of the muslims
is inherent in the goodwill of the Hindus. Is this a resolution ? What
is there in this
resolution ? This sentence appears absolutely immaculate, teeth less and
nail less like the truth told during the Satyanarayan Katha (story) (but
this immaculate sentence only has ignited fire in the Himalaya of the
secularists and engulfed it with its fury.) They are demanding ban on
the Sangh, they are charging it with overruling of the constitution,
they are equating their bloody intentions with the atrocities of Hitler.
Please try to compare very sentence with those one’s of Guruji Golwalkar.
Where in he had spoken of withdrawing in independence Bharat all rights
of citizenship to the muslims and had put a straight question mark on
their patriotism itself. Or this can be compared with Hitler’s sentences
of the mine of where in he had called the Jews the worst community of
the world and had tried to justify their mass killings. In comparison
this sentence from Banglore appears like a lamb amongst tigers. Does
this sentence not indicate the step by step cultural evolution of the
Sangh. In this sentence, sangh has indicated its concern for the safety
of the muslims.
After all which other
better solution do the secularists have to ensure safety of the muslims
? The secularists do not have even numerical strength. Their strength
does not equal the secularists themselves. It is much less. It may be
true that majority of Hindus are not Hinduists but they are not
secularists either. Hence the voice of the secularists, whenever they
try to raise it, gets subdued like that of a flute played with drums.
Howsoever pious their intentions be, they irritate a common Hindu. Such
common Hindu, a secularist and a cross between themselves. Hindus also
get divided into two. This clearly shows that a Hindu is conscious, is
aware of the duality and there is contemplation, pulling each other’s
reins. This can be understood, but how does it benefit the muslims ?
There, there is no duality, no contemplation, no churning of thou guts,
no discussions – It is just one single thought which is that they are
rotting in the hell of Kafiristhan, they are as pure as milk, their
clothes bear no stains, they do not need any cleaning, they do not need
to rethink on their ways and behavior. During the last two and a half
thousand years Hinduism has been cleaned up a number of times. Many a
storm like Mahavir, Buddha, Nanak, Kabir, Dayananda has been witnessed.
They tried to challenge the will of the God, and the exemplification of
the Vedas or have tried to define it very differently but has there been
any such reformist movement in the history of thousand five hundred
years of Islam ? The west has at times accepted or rejected the Bible
and Jesus in their own way; but has there been any such protestant
movement in Islam ? Except few Sufis and Kamal Ataturk we do not
remember any other name. This is tremendous materialistic attitude. Even
a matter like water rots when it is kept in any utensil for a long time,
but Islam has life. Why is it then that this living human community is
tied up with the shackles of materialism. Do our secularists ever try to
brake these shackles, which is holding as captive these Bharatiya
muslims for a thousand years ? Our secularists infact put few more locks
in them. They think that they are protecting the muslims. In fact they
are harming them. They are of no use to the muslims. They vanish after
raising their hopes. They set things afire and watch from a distance
under instigation through the secularists muslim even resort to rioting
or even try for retaliatory actions, but when they receive good beatings
or they are harmed, they do not find any saviors for them. They find
themselves singled. Out every where like the police, administration
government and this leads to hardening the feeling of insecurity and
separateness among them.
The main question is
how to eliminate this feeling of separatism and safety ? Even Mohd. Ali
Jinah himself did not have a solution for this problem. He took it that
Pakistan
was the answer, but that itself proved otherwise. Can one find any
country in the world today, more disturbed, turbulent and restless, than
Pakistan ? Certainly the muslims in India do not suffer from the pangs
of utter lack of safety, as what Pakistan does. Should not the muslims
in India take a lesson from Pakistan ? Pakistan was formed, it got
separated but how far has it gone ? It has got to stay with Bharat. It
could not, as yet, evolve a solution for living-together. This equation
of peaceful dwelling together alone is the acid test for the Islam in
South Asia. Let the muslims in South Asia review their history of the
past hundred and fifty years. Let them ask themselves whether any others
than muslims in South Asia (original Bharat) ever came to their rescue ?
Did anybody from Mecca-Medina or Baghdad ever come for help when the
last sinking ship of the Islamic rule lead by Bahadur Shah Jaffar was
seeing its doom. To save the Khilafat movement, muslims in Bharat left
no stone unturned, but when the independence movement was started the
Rulers of Afghanistan did not do anything other than showing lip
sympathy for them. During the last fifty years,
Pakistan
tried all its means to get itself equated as a West Asian Nation but it
has miserably failed to achieve that objective. Time and again it had to
revert to Bharatvarsh. Can the approximately 35 crore muslims of
Bharatvarsh (Bharat, Pak, Bangla Desh) leave South Asia and move
somewhere else ? Yahoodees can go to Israel/America, but where can our
muslims go ? They are neither aliens nor are they different from us.
Like the two nations (Pak and Bangladesh) and one of South Asia they
have got to live together in or with Bharatvarsh. Not merely live
together but dwell with mutual respect and safety and in peace.
They can not aspire
for this peace or safety from outside. It has got to come from inside.
This can happen only when they themselves shed away their doggedness.
Are they ready to rethink on the middle age doctrines such as Jehad,
Darul Harab, Kafir, Ganima etc ? The secularists can perhaps render
help, but they will not do so. They are selfish. They help only the
Hindus. Their secularism is only for the Hindus. The Mohammedans will
have to help themselves. This is their first task. The second task is
what the RSS has hinted in its resolution at Bangalore. This has been
done by RSS and that too after the
Gujarat carnage, it sounds more as a threat than a mere hint. Yet what ever
has been said by Sangh was being said by the well acclaimed Mohammedan
leaders like Sir Saiyad Ahmed, Maulana Azad and even Maulana Shaukat Ali
himself. But the irony is that no critic of such hight and demeanour has
been born amongst the Mohammedans who showed adequate courage to
propagate this truth. Earning good wishes of the Hindus does not at all
mean living at their mercy. It is better to die rather than living at
mercy. Be sure that the society which expects one of its own sections to
live at mercy, is not a civilized society, it is an ailing society and
not worthy of survival. Mercy never begets goodwill. To earn goodwill it
is obligatory to be self-reliant.
How will the
Mohammedans of Bharat be self-reliant ? If they keep clinging to the
middle age conventionality there are little chances of their becoming
self-reliant. The self-reliant person talks on equal footing, he does
not resort either to appeasement or rapprochement. He remains undaunted
both infront of his own people and others. If Bharatiya muslims remain
dauntless in front of the Hindus, there is no need why they should feel
daunted in the presence of the Arabs. Following Islam does not imply
being subservient to the Arabs. Why should our muslims blindly follow
their culture, their language, their manners or etiquettes, or their way
of life ? Do the Christians, world over blindly follow
Rome
or Palestine ? Buddhism is Indian, Budhdha was born in
India
but that does not mean that the Chinese, Japanese or the Koreans should
blindly follow Bharat. Whatever may be someone’s religion or sect, he
has his own cultural and national identify. He could perhaps be
prepared to sacrifice his life for that. Self respect certainly comes to
them of its own. They do not live on anybody’s mercy. |
