Islam and Urban Naxals in Indian Context:1

Maybe a little odd title for the blog or the blog itself. But in today’s context, in today’s India both are not only pertinent but have a lot of relevance because they are the burning topics of today which have India divided between us and them.

Right at the outset let me be very clear about my stance. I am against everything that under the garb of secularism, Congress did to the country but that does not mean 1. I am Pro BJP or 2. I am Anti Islamic. The very fact that we have 18% population of Muslims makes it impossible to wish them away. Whatever anybody, any extreme Right-wing thinkers or any political or non-political party may say. I strongly believe that everybody is as Indian as anybody else can be!

The problem starts only when we want to define India, as a nation in the first place?

What’s the definition of a nation, especially for a country like India where the diversity is so extreme that nothing is common between the two sets of people, as normally described, from Kashmir to Kanyakumari or from Nagaland to Gujrat.

To be politically, rather historically more correct India, a country what we call India today was never one country at any juncture of time in the annals of History, even under British rule. British may have been instrumental in sowing the seeds of united India under one flag but it was Sardar Patel who really tried hard to make the dream come true, of course not without losing a chunk of the notion. Forget about bigger princely states like Hyderabad, ruled by Nizam or Kashmir ruled by Harisingh, today’s Rajasthan, erstwhile Rajputana alone comprised of more than 23 states some not bigger than a bigger district in British India. All in all, there were 565 princely states in India before the British left. Again Thanks to Mr Patel for his single-handed herculean efforts to bring them under the Indian flag. So when we talk of India which India we are talking about?

In such a  state of immense diversity, the one thing that kept India united from times immortal was/is Hinduism as a polity and not a religion and today we are challenging the very foundation!

Partition, THE partition was definitely based on a religious basis, but the idea was not born when it really happened. It was conceived long before and was simmering for decades and the British with their divide and rule policy, definitely nurtured it, adding fuel to the fire whenever the opportunity arose. And there were plenty, provided by both the parties. So when we lament today about the Hindu Muslim divide, it is actually the culmination of what was sown long ago.

There is a basic difference in the ideologies of both religions. Hindus can’t call any other country as their homeland, while some Muslim theologist like, Hizb ut Tahirr say that” Muslims should abolish national boundaries within the Islamic world and return to the Islamic world known as the “Caliphate”, that would stretch from Indonesia to Morocco and contain more than 1.5 billion people. In essence, many like him believe that Islam cannot be constrained by geographical boundaries. And today’s world IS factually divided by geographically lines, how much arbitrary they maybe! The dream does not stop here. The followers of the theory believe that ’It will let Muslims challenge and ultimately conquer the West! ’The success of the Caliphate will also encourage more converts to Islam-eventually the whole world would be Islamic’” 
"In Europe they tell Muslims that they have to create parallel societies and they should not follow the European laws" says Ms Baran adding further,” If this happens it will be impossible for people like me to argue that Islam can be democratic”

Abu Mohammad, another Hizb Tahrir activist says,” Islam obliges Muslims to possess the power so that they can intimidate-I would not say terrorize-the enemies of Islam”.

So Hinduism along with India actually stand nowhere on the wider canvas nonetheless it too must be under the blanket to widen the base. While coming to Hinduism, the consensus among the western experts is,’ Hindu Nationalism however is, more of cultural nationalism called as ‘Hindu Polity’than actual Hindu nationalism.'

Some Islamic scholars like Yusuf al-Qaradawi hold the opinion that ’Support for democratic procedures like Elections, combined with religious or moral objections toward some aspects of Western democracy is viewed as incompatible with ‘Sharia’.India opted for democracy in 1950 and the first general elections were held in 1952. If one has to go by what many of the Muslim scholars and Clerics think, the Indian democracy is against Sharia and not fit for devout Muslim. In such circumstances how can we object to the assumption by the majority that Muslims in India don’t think India as their country!

The new word coined after world war II is” Islamism” that’s mostly religiously oriented and not by geographical borders. Does the problem of Muslims in India stand somewhere in between? Nation[ though arbitrary] named India or religion named Islam!

To be continued.....