Is there some thing called moderate Islam? The answer to this question depends on which way you look at the question and there are presumably different ways of looking at it. Some Muslims are moderate to the extent that they do not pursue an extreme and radical view of Islam. But both moderate and non-moderate Muslims share a concept of Islam that is absolutist as a belief and as a way of life. Any absolutist concept is intrinsically dangerous and Islam is no exception in that sense.
Some secular writers living in the West are saying that Islamophobia is on the rise in the West after 9/11, London serial blast and Madrid bombing. The spectre of Islamophobia, they say, is posing danger to multi-cultural societies such as England. Personally, I wish I can agree with them. And it is politically correct to do so. But I encounter problem when I find that even highly educated Muslim youths are willing to be propelled to be human bombs and kill innocent people in the name of their religion. And the so-called moderate Muslims are not as visible as they should be in condemning this menace that seeks to harm modernity (in the sense in which most of us understand the term).
Perhaps the problem lies in what I understand as central to Islam's view of the world. It divides the world into two entities: dar-ul-Islam (land of peace) and dar-ul-harb (land of war). The division might have been relevant during the early days of Islam when it was waging a battle for survival. This division of the world cannot be more absurd in this age of democracy, freedoms, gender equality, liberal values etc. Unless the so-called moderate Muslims come out to debate these issues honestly and critically, those raising serious concerns about rising intolerance among Muslims as a community cannot be debunked as completely wrong.
Some secular writers living in the West are saying that Islamophobia is on the rise in the West after 9/11, London serial blast and Madrid bombing. The spectre of Islamophobia, they say, is posing danger to multi-cultural societies such as England. Personally, I wish I can agree with them. And it is politically correct to do so. But I encounter problem when I find that even highly educated Muslim youths are willing to be propelled to be human bombs and kill innocent people in the name of their religion. And the so-called moderate Muslims are not as visible as they should be in condemning this menace that seeks to harm modernity (in the sense in which most of us understand the term).
Perhaps the problem lies in what I understand as central to Islam's view of the world. It divides the world into two entities: dar-ul-Islam (land of peace) and dar-ul-harb (land of war). The division might have been relevant during the early days of Islam when it was waging a battle for survival. This division of the world cannot be more absurd in this age of democracy, freedoms, gender equality, liberal values etc. Unless the so-called moderate Muslims come out to debate these issues honestly and critically, those raising serious concerns about rising intolerance among Muslims as a community cannot be debunked as completely wrong.
3 comments:
All semitic religions thrive on absolutism. They assume that if a brake was not applied, people would not be contained. The theory is false. To prove this point, let me introduce characters and topics that are considered unmentionable. Now all of us know that more than ninety percent of all people on this planet are believers. So if we take the route of the inversely proportional rate of crimes, the believers constitute almost all of the criminals whereas people openly say that if you do not beleive in god, you will not hesitate to do any crime be it the worst kind of crime imaginable. I believe the opposite is true. Some of the biggest humanitarians have been non believers. That aside, the precariousness of Islamophobia was bound to arrive at some point or other. It has its roots in the petrodollar. The fastest growing religion in the world, Islam needed to back itself with clout and might which usually comes with money and power. But somehow that did not happen. It did not happen because Islam did not change with the times, looked down upon education and frowend on female upliftment.You will notice that the dress code matters only to women, whereas all the other activities matter only to men. Of course all religions are men-centric, ( after all god is a man, right? ) and change is frowned upon. This might have been the reason that there are no reformers in Islam and sadly no single person of repute who could change the course of history or herstory, on whom the community could take pride. So in comes the Mullah preaching his inane fatwas and his extolling the mujahideens add fuel to fire. As you said it is no small wonder that even educated youths do not hesitate to take up arms against the innocent. But hope is at hand. It is said that at least Kerala will be free of religious fanaticism in 20- 25 years. You can already see the changes taking place around us if you care to look.
I would like to share your optimism about the situation in Kerala in future. But I am not so sure. Perhaps, higher education that large number of girls, including Muslim girls, are getting today shows a ray of hope that things might turn out to be tough for those practising intolerance. There is also equal chance of male chauvinists in the community making pre-emptive strike to restrain the female force. Fear of the female sexuality is central to the practice of open subjugation of women by majority of Muslims.
All religions have gone through their own crisis and have come out the better. Look at Christianity---we may not have been around those days when it was dark and vicious. The church had no hesitation in killing voices of reason.
Likewise, Hinduism has had its share of horrors in the early days with the exception that lack of a centralised body did not allow any acts of horror to get institutionalised. Thank goodness for that. In fact, that has been and will continue to be the biggest plus of Hinduism and Hindus. Which also explains why all attempts of the powers that be to institutionalise and bring Hindus under a band is often repulsed at the most rudimentary level.
Now coming to Islam--my belief is that it too is going through a process of change, which is not visible to us. When the waters churn, it often throws up residues. And anyone who would have attempted to clean a tank, and a small one at that, will testify that the sediments at the bottom can be pretty dirty. I genuinely believe that that is indeed the case. Christianity also proclaiams that there is only one GOD--Jesus. Since the early days, we have seen so many different nomenclatures that one is often taken aback to learn of a new sect that we didn't know that existed.
So, Islam too will reconcile to the world around and come around. It just so happens that Islam's churn is happening at a time when the world around us is changing rapidly, and even the most rationale of us find it difficult to cope with them without it shaking some of our beliefs.
From burning at the stake to public stoning in the early christian days to blowing one self and others with it. Different forms and means.
I don't think there is any merit in taking a stance on such things. The earth is bigger than all of us. How often do we look back at the dark ages of Europe and blanch? It is just a piece of history. Some want to be part of the text book. So, may be Osama wants to be in the books of History. So, be it. Frankly, little of all this matters.
It is good for conversation and little else.
Inshallah!
Latha
Post a Comment