Author: Prafull Goradia
Publication: The Pioneer
Date: May 13, 2004
It is extraordinary that Mr Mulayam
Singh Yadav, who has often been endearingly addressed as Maulana, should
now face the odium of the Muslims. The provocation has been an advertisement
by the Samajwadi Party which compares his sacrifices with those of Imam
al Husayn at Karballa. On behalf of the ulema in UP, Maulana Kalbe Jawwad
has asked the party to apologise for hurting the sentiments of Muslims.
A few days earlier, Maqbool Fida Husain was well advised to withdraw his
film Meenaxi from the theatres. There was no point in offending the sentiments
of those who empathise with Maulana Abdul Quddus Kashmiri. Why should an
ordinary mortal like Meenaxi be praised in words which were used in the
Holy Quran for Prophet Muhammad?
Surprisingly, even a Muslim like
Husain was not fully au fait with the sensitivities of his own co-religionists.
Non-Muslims are at a greater disadvantage because they are neither conversant
with Islamic theology nor with Arabic and Persian languages. Anyone familiar
with Arabic would have known the context of the words noor-un-ala-noor
or light of the superior kind.
Nevertheless, if Hindus and Muslims
wish to live in true ongoing harmony, it is essential that both the communities
understand the sensitivities, or lack of it, of the two faiths. The non-Muslims
of Calcutta were dumfounded soon after the Republic Day of 1969. A bloody
riot followed what was published in The Statesman supplement of the day.
To quote the daily of February 1, 1969, "In all, four people were killed,
three in police firing and one following a cracker explosion during disturbances
in the Chowringhee area, Calcutta... The editor of The Statesman had expressed
his regret if the publication had hurt the feelings of a particular community".
A joint appeal by many popular leaders, including Mr Jyoti Basu, Governor
Dharma Vira and Prof Humayun Kabir, fell on deaf ears.
The casus bellie of the violence
was an article contributed by Prof Arnold Toynbee in memory of Mahatma
Gandhi. The sentence found objectionable by the ulema was, "Like Muhammad,
Gandhi went into politics deliberately, but, unlike Muhammad, Gandhi did
not take this step under pressure of a crisis in his personal career."
The Calcutta incident was by no
means the first demonstration of comparable Muslim wrath. BR Ambedkar in
his book, Thoughts on Pakistan, had another incident to record. That was
in 1927 at Lahore. A book titled Rangila Rasul was written in retaliation
to the publication of Sita ka Chinala by a Muslim which alleged that Sita,
wife of Ram, was a prostitute. Other than the publication of Rangila Rasul,
there was no known reaction to this ridicule of the revered heroine of
Ramayan. Yet the obscurantists did not overlook the exception. The author
and the publisher were murdered soon after.
Except that no blood has been spilt
as yet, the ulema were unsparing on Salman Rushdie. Their fatwa was powerful
enough to influence the Government of India to ban his book, The Satanic
Verses, even without reading it. Almost equally harsh were the ulema on
Taslima Nasrin and her Lajja as well as Dwikhandito. So much so that the
Government of West Bengal banned the latter book.
The Hindus, whether of India, Bangladesh
or Nepal, find this spectacle of Muslim reaction beyond their comprehension.
Yet their leaders or scholars do not appear to attempt to understand the
phenomenon. A probable explanation of their indifference could be their
own infinite tolerance. For example, no Hindu has raised a finger at the
Husain painting which shows Sita masturbating on the tail of Hanuman. Or
Parvati fornicating with a bull while husband Shiva looks on. Or Goddess
Durga in union with her lion. The paintings were reproduced in a volume
edited by Husain himself and published by Tata Iron & Steel Company
Limited in 1988.
Many a Hindu felt embarrassed, if
not also ashamed, at the demolition of the Babri Masjid. But the same Hindu
is blase about the destruction of hundreds of temples whether at Mathura,
Varanasi, Vidisha, Jaunpur, Ajmer, Pandua et al. He is magnanimous enough
to dismiss the iconoclasm as medieval barbarism. So overwhelming is his
tolerance that he does not wish to hear that over 500 temples have been
desecrated between Pakistan, Bangladesh and our own Kashmir over the last
two decades.
The Hindu conscience was justifiably
sore over the 2002 riots in Gujarat and the killings of several hundred
innocent lives. But he was readily forgiving about the burning alive of
58 Hindus at Godhra. The Hindu, unfortunately, interprets Muslim behaviour
through his own value system or frame of reference. The result is a misreading
of the Muslim psyche. It is not correct to view the straight, simple, single-mindedness
of the Muslim through the binoculars of Hindu double standards.
