Why is it important to discuss and reflect back on the destruction of the Azizia Madrasa in particular? The Azizia Madrasa is significant in more than one ways. It was a heritage site established in 1910, making it over 110 years old. It holds special salience as it is an important and prestigious centre of learning and education for the Muslim community. The Azizia Madrasa is located over a sprawling three-acre campus. The library of the Madrasa, which had over 4500 books, 250 of them being rare manuscripts which were hand written, was completely gutted in the fire started by a mob comprising over 150 persons who attacked the Madrasa between 5.30pm and 6pm on 31^st March, 2023.

It is imperative and fairly instructive to understand the scale of the damage in the Madrasa which will help reflect on important questions. How was such a massive structure set on fire? Why was this Madrasa targeted in the first place? The Madrasa had a beautiful two storied library and Hall, several classrooms, a computer lab and hostels for the students to reside. The haunting site that the fact-finding team was greeted with, when it visited the Madrasa, was a ruined large hall which was once opulent. The large hall had majestic pillars covered in black soot as was the high roof. The hall had a graceful mezzanine floor which had books and answer sheets in the almirahs. The hall had 10 ceiling fans which were warped from the flames of the fire. The mangled furniture was stacked hopelessly in one of the corners of the hall.  The total height of the grand hall and the mezzanine library is about 20 feet giving it an appearance of aesthetic grandeur.

What did it take to burn down the hall and Library of this scale? Petrol bombs were used to set the madrasa on fire. It is quite obvious that to burn down the hall and library of this size it would take substantial quantity of petrol. How was such large quantity of petrol transported? Surely this is not a spontaneous act. Petrol bombs were planted outside each classroom and the authors saw the signs of soot on the doors of the classrooms. The water pipes in the Madrasa too were cut deliberately so that the fire can’t be put off. The CCTVs were completely burnt. So extensive was the damage that the corridor was filled with a layer of 6 inches of ashes. The roof of the corridors was still black from the soot when the fact-finding team visited the Madrasa. The Library of the Madrasa had 4500 books of philosophy, science, Islamic jurisprudence etc. It included 250 rare books which were handwritten manuscripts and were of great value. It took a ditch four feet deep and 10 feet wide to bury the ashes of these burnt books. One can gauge the intensity of the fire from the uprooted floor in the Hall. The office of the Madrasa was completely burnt and the staff didn’t even have a single chair or table to use. All the valuable records were burnt.

The petrol bombs used to burn the Madrasa and the extent of damage point towards the planned nature of attack. The persistent attempt to destroy the Madrasa also is a testimony to the same. While the Madrasa was attacked on 31^st March, it was also attacked again on 1^st April when a mob came from the back of the complex. It is noteworthy that the administration had imposed a curfew on 31^st March and 1^st April. Ironically, despite the curfew, the Madrasa was attacked again on 1^st April when some miscreants entered the Madrasa from the back and tried to ignite a kerosene stove under a wooden cot. The Hindu Nepali watchman of the Madrasa was beaten up by the mob when he tried to stop them. He was let go when he told them he was a Hindu. This selected targeting of the Madrasa gives away the intention behind the attack. Similar attempts to attack the Madrasa were made in 1981 and 2017 when communal violence engulfed the city.

This draws the focus to the important question that why is the Madrasa a constant target of attacks? The answer is that the Madrasa which symbolizes Muslim culture and knowledge, is attacked with a communal agenda to demonstrate hegemony of the Hindu right wing. As opposed to the popular perception shaped predominantly by communal narratives, the Azizia madrasa is no den of terrorism but recognized as a model madrasa by the state. The Madrasa has been the Markaaz for four surrounding districts. There are programmes run by the Madrasa to spread awareness amongst the students and teachers about the inter-religious approach. It has been recognized by UNESCO for its rich heritage and finds mention by United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA).  However, the Hindu right wing targeted the Madrasa in a bid to avenge the alleged burning down of the Nalanda University by Bakhtiyar Khilji in 1197.  This is an oft repeated narrative by the right wing in the region of Bihar Sharif. That Azizia Madrasa is prestigious centre of learning, knowledge and religion contributed to it being a target of vicious attack. This attack which has cost invaluable rare manuscripts and other cultural infrastructure has demoralized the Muslim community and expose its vulnerability in the face of violent ideology that hugely influences the response of the state to such threats of destruction and intimidation.

What struck the fact-finding team when it visited the Madrasa was the teacher was teaching a science lesson on the topic of light in English to a classroom full of girl students. The Madrasa is school to over 500 students, 85% of them girls from first grade to twelfth grade. The Madrasa is salient also because of the number of Muslim girls studying in it. It is generally observed that after communal violence, the mobility and exposure of girls from marginalized communities including to schools is usually restricted out of concerns of safety. However, it was heartening to witness the faith the parents of the girls have reposed in the management of the Madrasa and are sending their daughters back to school which is still in the process of being repaired even after four months of the attack. The team also saw the computer room in the Madrasa and a science lab full of charts of human anatomy and other science topics. Thus, the Madrasa was not an obscure institution catering to only few Muslim students teaching Islam and religious tenets but a centre for education of modern relevant subjects.

That the Madrasa has contributed meaningfully to society and Muslim intelligentsia is evident from the illustrious alumni the Madrasa boasts of.  Some of the alumni included Maulana Abu Salma, who retired as Principal of Madrasa in Agra, Maulana Masood Ali Nadwi, prominent author and writer and Mufti Nizamuddin who retired as Mufti Azam (grand Mufti) in Darul Deoband. Darul Deoband is the prestigious institution for learning of Islam and philosophy. Other alumni include Maulana Abdul Rehman who was the 5^th Amir-e- Shariat (Custodian of Islamic jurisprudence), Maulana Shabnam Kalami, renowned poet who is recipient of various awards from the state and his poetry has been included in Bihar Board syllabus. The alumni also include Dr. M. M Kamal, who retired as Registrar of Veer Kanwar Singh University. These alumni have thus contributed in the sphere of education, religion, culture and literature. Established in 1896 in Patna and later shifted in 1910 to in Bihar Sharif, a historic city in the Nalanda district of Bihar, Madrasa Azizia was built by the philanthropist Bibi Soghra in memory of her husband, Abdul Aziz. Soghra inherited property worth lakhs after her husband’s death and decided to donate it. The Azizia Madrasa was built by Bibi Soghra’s donations. Others include Soghra High School and Soghra College. They are still managed by Soghra Waqf Estate.

The Madrasa symbolized not just knowledge but cultural heritage and social cohesion. The Madrasa has existed for over a century and stands testament to the cordial and peaceful relations between Hindu and Muslims in Bihar Sharif and beyond in the state of Bihar. The team was informed that the relationship between the Madrasa management and the Hindu neighbours have been marked by respect and cooperation.   Madrasa thus posed no threat to state or society. The relations with Hindu neighbours have been cordial and friendly and there is heathy socialization. In fact, fifty percent shops in the Madrasa complex which are about 40 shops are allotted to Hindus.

Despite the centrality and importance of scale that the Azizia embodies, the state and the media didn’t do it any justice. The state’s response has been tardy and inadequate, bordering complicity when the Madrasa was set on fire along with other parts of Bihar Sharif. The fire brigade reached the Madrasa only after midnight though the fire began at around 5.30 pm. The administration was not prompt in responding to the pleas of help from the Imam or other staff of the Madrasa. However, ironically, the administration promptly cleared up the debris and ashes in the property in the wee hours of 1^st April. It appeared like the administration wanted to clear away evidence. The state which surveyed the extensive damage of the Madrasa to the tune of INR 3.42 crores including furniture, almirahs, computers etc. has not released any compensation amount. The state has so far only installed a barbed wire fencing around the Madrasa. The media too didn’t give the kind of coverage the Madrasa of the significance it is deserves. The local and national media trivialized the fire and the damages and it took international media including the BBC to report the extent of damage and severity of the attack on the Madrasa

The management of the Madrasa too pointed out that the Madrasa was targeted for the cultural resources it possessed. The Hindutva narrative that the Nalanda University was destroyed by Bakhtiyar Khilji and that act should be avenged by destroying the Madrasa has been oft repeated. Nalanda University was a giant institution and a great centre of Buddhist learning, philosophy, maths, science. It was at one point headed by the iconic mathematician Aryabhatta. It had students from Korea, China, Turkey and other Eastern and Central parts of Asia studying in the University. The library of Nalanda University was home to massive collection of rare books and wealth of knowledge.

It is not known widely that the attack by Khilji on Nalanda University was not the first time Nalanda University was attacked. It was attacked by the Huns under Mihirkula in the 5th Century, and again sustained severe damages from an invasion of the Gauda king of Bengal, in the 8th Century. Huns came to plunder. The attack by the King of Bengal was the result of a growing antagonism between their Shaivite Hindu sect and the Buddhists at the time. There is no single widely accepted historical reason as to why the University was attacked by Khilji. One of the reasons cited which seems implausible claims that Khilji burnt down the University out of spite after Rahul Shribhadra cured him when the doctors in his own court were unable to. In a fit of rage, Khilji wanted to destroy this centre of knowledge. It is worth noting that when Khilji attacked Nalanda it was already on a decline and ascending into ruins due to violence arising from the rivalry between Hinayana and Mahayana Buddhist sects or their influence by Brahminism. However there is no consensus on any one theory by the historians.

The question, after witnessing this senseless destruction of heritage and centre for learning, that confronts us as civilized society is whether revenge is good enough motivation for burning down an institution like Azizia? Did we want Azizia Madrasa or should we want Azizia Madrasa to go down in history with the same fate as Nalanda University? Should we become another Khilji even if we believe that Khilji burned down Nalanda? Should centres signifying reason, knowledge, culture and social harmony be allowed to be engulfed in flames of hatred and communal venom? And should we be mute spectators to this dance of violence and destruction? If razing down Nalanda University was wrong then burning down Azizia was equally wrong. It is time we judge violence from the lens of justice and not revenge. The focus should shift from destruction to dialogue, from vengeance to understanding. The burning of Azizia Madrasa signifies a larger struggle between preserving cultural heritage, nurturing interfaith harmony, and confronting the destructive force of violence. Beyond the immediate destruction, the incident compels us to address these issues with urgency and empathy before the flames of hatred engulf humanity and knowledge.

Related:

‘Books now, humans later’: An ominous warning for the nation

Hindutva mobs in Bihar run amok, cause loss of Rs. 6 crores

The post Azizia Madrasa: Burning of just a Madrasa or Cultural Genocide? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The death of George Floyd in Minneapolis has evoked a sea of responses globally and shaken the conscience of the world. Americans from all walks of life irrespective of colour have come out in large protest rallies to condemn racism and police brutality in the US. There were some unfortunate instances of looting and violence during these protests but by and large the protests were peaceful, sparking debate and bringing the focus on the deep entrenched systemic racism in the country.

George Floyd was a 47-year-old African-American who died in police custody when police officer, Derek Chauvin knelt over his neck for around nine excruciating minutes even as Floyd gasped for air pleading with the officer to release pressure from his neck, repeating “I can’t breathe”. The imagery of George Floyd’s humiliation and inhumane subjugation at the hands of the unrelenting Derek Chauvin in his final moments has shaken the social and moral consciousness of the individuals the world over, calling for condemnation and police reforms against police brutality and excesses.

While George Floyd’s death has exposed the long historically existent fault lines based on race, this incident has triggered a discourse on police brutalities which are targeting the vulnerable communities in every country. There are parallels to “George Floyd moments” to be found worldwide. In India, George Floyd’s death unwittingly conjures the imagery of the biased police action against religious minorities especially the Muslims and the Dalits which is starkly marked by prejudice and systemic targeting of these marginalized groups. This prejudice against the Muslims partly stems from and is patronized by the supremacist ideology at helm. Here the author would like to reflect on the striking differences in the responses of Indian state as compared to the United States while dealing with police action vis a vis vulnerable groups.

In response to the outrage in the United States by the protestors, the state has come up with a number of proposals to address police brutality. Two most far reaching responses being discussed are, firstly to “defund” the Minneapolis Police Department and second is the drastic step to disband the police department force entirely in favour of the new community led safety model (Source: The Tribune, 2020). Defunding of the police department would imply massive budgetary cuts to the police which the protestors believed were disproportionately used against the coloured community and reallocating them to public health, mental health, education and affordable housing for the poor. The Minneapolis City Council has vowed to go as far as disbanding the entire police force something unthinkable in countries today where the idea of security is intimately intertwined with a lethally overreaching armed police force. These sweeping changes underline the recognition of the systemic bias and discrimination that exists in the institution as of now. As against these measures seen in the United States, in India there has been a visible trend of placing the police in the position of extreme power and privilege, even in the face of compelling evidences.

The most recent example is that of Khwaja Yunus, a young 27-year-old man who died in police custody in 2003. He was a resident of Parbhani in Maharashtra who was arrested for his alleged involvement in the Ghatkopar blasts on December 2, 2002. He was a software engineer arrested with four other accused. While the police claimed that Yunus had escaped from custody, his then co-accused, Dr. Mohammad Matin who was the first prosecution witness before the trial court in January, had submitted that he had seen Yunus being stripped and assaulted on January 6, 2003, following which, he was never seen again. Based on the complaint of Yunus’ co-accused in 2003, an FIR was filed against the policemen (Modak, 2018). Four police officers were prima facie found guilty and suspended from services. However earlier this month they were reinstated. The High Court in 2004 had directed disciplinary enquiry against the four accused. This enquiry was never carried out and instead the four accused police officers were reinstated in contrary to the orders of the High Court.

The ill treatment and torture of the innocent Khwaja Yunus is not a stray incident. Muslim youth are perceived as “natural” suspects in terror attacks reflecting the stigma and demonization of the Muslim community in India. Many innocent Muslim youth are incarcerated under stringent acts like UAPA or POTA and remain in prison for years and released only after years when no evidence is found against them.

Mohammed Saleem Ansari, a mechanical engineer was released from jail in 2016 after the Supreme Court absolved him of the terror-related charges under which he had been in prison for 23 long years. Ansari, along with three other Muslims, walked out of a Jaipur jail on May 17 after the Supreme Court on May 11 acquitted them of all charges, setting aside their life sentence and ordering their immediate release. They were among the 16 who were booked for triggering five blasts on trains on the first anniversary of the Babri Masjid demolition, which killed two passengers and injured eight. All of them were charged under the Terrorist and Disruptive Acts Prevention Act (Shaikh, 2016). 

In another incident, in 2015, Shoaib Khan, 28, from Hingoli, Maulana Mujeeb-ur-Rahman, 30, from Yavatmal and Abdul Malik, 23 from Pusad were arrested by Maharashtra Police and their cases were transferred to Maharashtra’s Anti-Terrorism Squad. In June 2019, they were acquitted of all charges and walked free after a harrowing time in prison. While the media and police painted a picture of radicalization of the Muslim youth in India and alleged that the three were involved in “jihadi” terror acts, Khan narrated a harrowing tale of torture in police custody to extract false statements (Johari, 2019) A 2012 study by the Tata Institute of Social Sciences found that although Muslims account for 10.6 per cent of the Maharashtra population, they comprise over 30 per cent of the prison population. The study observed that the police and intelligence agencies’ bias against Muslims led to a number of arrests under TADA and MCOC Acts, and even the Official Secrets Act.

The common thread running in all these cases is the humiliation and stigmatization that the community faces owing to its religious identity. The years lost in police or judicial custody after undergoing unbearable torture can never be redeemed and are wasted forever. The torture and stigma scars the victims for the rest of their lives. The victimization of Muslim youth in police custody is not a coincidence but one finds a well-established pattern of police interface with the Muslim community. This becomes clear in the context of communal riots and mob lynching. There are numerous studies and commission reports which points towards the biased nature of police during communal riots targeting the vulnerable communities.

The Srikrishna Commission report (1998) underlines the “built in bias” of the Bombay police force which manifested in the riots in Bombay in 1992 and other places in Maharashtra. The Report of Justice D.P. Madon Commission on Bhiwandi riots (1970) passed severe strictures on the role of police in Bhiwandi riots. On anti-Sikh riots, three inquiry commissions—Justice Rangnath Mishra Commission (1987), Justice Jain-D.K. Agarwal Committee (1990), and Justice R.S. Narula Panal (1994) submitted their reports and all inquiry commissions had unanimously indicted 72 police officers and clearly outline the discriminatory role of the police. Similarly, there are many reports by fact finding committees that give appalling findings on the police’s partisan role in the Gujarat riots of 20021.

In the mob lynching cases that surfaced post 2014, the police are still found wanting at multiple levels- right from protecting the victims from the bloodthirsty mob, to shoddy investigations allowing the perpetrators to walk away free without punishment and to in fact implicate the victims themselves under stringent charges. One can’t erase the image of the police in Hapur escorting the perpetrators who are seen dragging the helpless bleeding victims, Mohammad Qasim and Samiuddin in a hurry (Source: Times of India, 2018). Rakbar Khan in Alwar lost his life due to the fatal casualness of the police who stopped to drink tea for three hours while Rakbar Khan bled to death on the way to the hospital after being lynched by the mob (Goswami & Sharma, 2018). There are many such incidents where the police have proved to be an obstacle in saving innocent lives and delivering justice.

These hair-raising incidents must surely compel one to think that despite severity and frequency of such incidents, why doesn’t India have the “George Floyd moment” meaning large scale protests or movement on the lines of Black Lives Matter. This is answered with brilliant insight by political scientist Suhas Palshikar who explained that any such protests or voices of dissent are linked to a thriving democracy.

The State has steadily delegitimized concern or voices for rights of the marginalized by posing them as threat to order or nation itself (Palshikar, 2020). This carefully constructed narrative has created a barrier for generating empathy in the larger society for the plights of the marginalized no matter how brutally they are violated. This policy is in tandem with the supremacist ideology which hinges on the central idea of constructing a community of second-class citizens; the Muslims, Christians and Dalits. Thus, while outrage and pain of the protestors reverberated in most of United States where police in some places took the knee to symbolically acknowledge police excesses and it was their way to offer an apology, the Indian state has most viciously treated protestors.

The recent example was the handling of anti-Citizenship Amendment Act protests by the police. The police have used stun grenades and tear gas on innocent students of Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) which led to serious injuries like loss of sight and loss of limb of some students (Source: The Wire, 2019). This is even as Portland and Seattle have temporarily restricted the use of tear gas on protesters. There was a brutal crackdown on the students of Jamia Millia Islamia in Delhi for which the police came under criticism. The UP police publicly shamed the protestors by putting up their posters and names warning that their property would be attached to recover against damages to public property. The High Court took up this case and observed that the government was “impinging on privacy, respect and freedom” and called it an “illegal move” (Source: NDTV, 2020). One can gauge how inhumanely the police in India deal with protestors going by the arrest of Safoora Zargar, a Jamia Millia Islamia student who is five months pregnant and booked by the Delhi police under the draconian UAPA where she is denied bail. She along with other students was protesting against the National Register of Citizens (NRC) and National Register of Population (NRP) (The New Indian Express, 2020).

After George Floyd’s death, California’s governor ordered the state’s police training program to stop teaching neck holds. Other governments discussed new policies for apprehending suspects to reduce the risk of deadly encounters. These steps are to minimize injuries or deaths to suspects apprehended by police and placed in police custody. Instead of such steps, encounters or extra judicial killings are being used as state policy in Uttar Pradesh. Officials have admitted to over 3,500 police encounters and nearly 80 killings of alleged criminals in a period of over two years, forcing the Supreme Court to intervene (Indian Express, 2019). These encounters have mostly targeted Muslim youth and have made the Muslim community fear for their life and freedom.

These issues highlighted above are directly linked to accountability and democratic institutions. For democratic institutions to thrive and function with fairness, on one hand there must be participatory democracy where people have the freedom to actively and fearlessly participate and on the other hand a state which builds, invests and encourages institution infrastructure. Individuals have to reclaim the public spaces as citizens to express their empathy and outrage at the violations of rights of the marginalized sections of the society. These protests or voices can’t be delegitimized by the state. The state has to actively and consciously nurture and reinforce democratic institutions for accountability. While world over there is a growing trend of dismantling of monuments of oppression and slavery, in India the statues of Godse and Manu are worshipped under the present ideology and this is a matter of concern when India is hailed as the largest democracy. Hopefully, India too will take inspiration from the support to George Floyd and redeem its own state and people in favor of liberty, justice and fraternity.

1 https://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/40546/13/16_chapter7.pdf

This piece first appeared in Centre for Study of Society and Secularism and the original piece may be read here.

The post Do all Lives Matter in India? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

“..the foreign races in Hindusthan must either adopt the Hindu culture and language, must learn to respect and hold in reverence Hindu religion, must entertain no idea but those of the glorification of the Hindu race and culture, i.e., of the Hindu nation and must lose their separate existence to merge in the Hindu race, or may stay in the country, wholly subordinated to the Hindu Nation, claiming nothing, deserving no privileges, far less any preferential treatment -not even citizen’s rights”, said Golwalkar in his We or our Nationhood Defined (Golwalkar). Golwalkar was the second chief and ideologue of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), a hardline, supremacist organization, which is the ideological parent of BJP .This is the foundational principle underlying the Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019, which allows accelerated naturalization to Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, Parsis and Christians from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan to get citizenship of India, that the current BJP government has hastily pushed through, sparking country-wide protests and palpable anxiety. As is clear from the ideas of Golwalkar, ‘Hindu race’ is supreme in India and whoever does not belong to the Hindu race stands to lose even citizenship rights. The Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019, which embodies this premise of Golwalkar, is also a knee jerk reaction of the BJP to suit its politics in retrospect of the disaster of NRC in Assam.

In order to understand the intent and import of this Act, it will be useful to trace the inconsistent positions of the BJP over the years. Its position at different times makes it clear that BJP never had a well thought-out, consistent stand on CAA but has brought it in merely for its political exigencies. This can be explained by taking into account that the crux of the CAA is giving citizenship to the “persecuted” Hindus, Christians, Sikhs, Buddhists, Parsis and Jains from the three stated countries. This is quite contradictory to the long held political position of the BJP. The BJP, without making any distinction on basis of religion (Hindus or Muslims), have always maintained that illegal immigrants are a threat to the identity and economy of India, and especially Assam. Assam, which has a porous border with Bangladesh, may have had both, Hindu and Muslim immigrants who came to India for better economic opportunities. It is difficult to determine who is a persecuted Hindu. Besides, the BJP never cared to find out how many immigrants had grounds for persecution and who they were.

In 2008, during the UPA government at the Centre, Mr. Advani, BJP’s foremost leader, had vehemently mounted a scathing attack on the then government for not tackling the influx of illegal migrants from Bangladesh, which was altering the demography of Assam. So strong was his concern, that he warned, “Assam as a whole today is fighting for survival. And the threat to its survival has come from a flood of illegal migrants from neighbouring Bangladesh. If this flood is not controlled, Assam will face extinction under the inundation caused by foreigners” (Economic Times, 2008). He went on to claim that there were over 3.5 million Bangladeshi illegal migrants in India, which was aggravating terrorism here (Times of India, 2008). Here, too, no distinction was made between Hindus and Muslims, nor was persecution of Hindus in Bangladesh mentioned. This is not the only figure available, of the illegal immigrants. Murli Manohar Joshi, once, claimed that there were 1.7 crore Bangladeshi infiltrators in India and most of them were in Kishenganj. It is interesting to note that at that time, the entire population of Kishenganj was 15 lakhs only (Engineer & Dalwai, 1995).

This points towards two things. For one, the BJP leaders had no data to prove their incredulous claims, which were not logical. Arbitrary figures were given in public domain by them to create paranoia against immigrants, and this made them popular in Assam. Secondly, over a period of time, they insinuated and popularized the narrative that illegal immigrants from Bangladesh is coterminous with Muslims. Thus, they wanted everyone to believe that all illegal immigrants were Muslims. In fact, they made a distinction- Muslim immigrants were called “infiltrators”, connoting aggression and sense of animosity, while Hindu immigrants were called “refugees” (Engineer & Dalwai, Immigrants in Bombay: A Fact Finding Report, 1995). It was not proven by any credible data that the Hindu immigrants were, in any way, refugees, and not just immigrants who had migrated for livelihood, like the Muslim immigrants. This resentment towards illegal migrants is shared by the current Home Minister, Amit Shah who said, “…illegal immigrants are like termites. They are eating the grain that should go to the poor, they are taking our jobs” (The Hindu, 2019). It is, then ironical that Amit Shah would want to flood the whole country with immigrants.

The Central government had exempted the migrants from adverse penal consequences of the Passport Act 1920 and the Foreigners Act, 1946 (which requires that undocumented immigrants prove their citizenship) through notifications in 2015 and 2016. This, also, made them eligible for long term visa to stay in India. In effect, this provided a solution to the immigrants, if they were really persecuted, to avoid punishment and allowed them a wide range of rights, barring a few like the right to vote or to hold political and constitutional post. If this was the case, it makes one wonder what was the need for this amendment in 2019, unless vote bank politics was the motive by giving the immigrants voting rights. This is the same vote bank politics that BJP accuses the Congress of but it itself indulges in this very cleverly.

In its political manifesto of 2014, BJP mentioned that addressing the issue of infiltration and illegal immigrants in the Northeast was its priority. And to address this concern, it wanted to review and improve the border management. It promised punitive measures to check illegal immigration. At the same time, it mentioned in the same manifesto that “India shall remain a natural home for persecuted Hindus and they shall be welcome to seek refuge here”. But here clearly, the intent of the BJP is to foment discontent in Assam against Bengali-speaking Hindus and Muslims and push for instruments like NRC, targeting Muslims who the BJP believes to be “foreigners” and “infiltrators”. There was no specific concern about the refugees of the abovementioned religions while dealing with the problem of the so-called infiltration from the east.

In July 2018, when the draft list of the NRC was published which excluded 4 million residents, a large number of them being Hindus caught unwittingly in the process of hounding out the Muslims, the BJP had to start thinking of ways in which to protect the citizenship of the excluded Hindus, which forms its political support base. This is when the idea of Citizenship Amendment Bill 2019 started to be pushed aggressively. This perhaps explains that BJP, for the first time, stated in clear and unambiguous terms in its election manifesto its intent to propose the Citizenship amendment Bill as we know it today. At the end of August 2019, when the final NRC list was published leaving out 1.9 million, again most of them Hindus, the scramble to introduce the Bill and get it passed accelerated.

The BJP, in the face strong protests by students and from other quarters, is reiterating that the CAA, in no way, targets Muslims in India. However, CAA cannot be viewed in isolation and has to be examined and analysed in the light of the announcement of the ruling dispensation that NRC will be implemented throughout the country. In its support, it argues that Bangladeshi illegal immigrants are spread throughout India. But, fearing the repeat of the NRC experience in Assam, which now the BJP has disowned in some way, the CAA is the backdoor entry for those Hindus likely to be excluded from the NRC process. Its intent is to exclude Muslims and strip them of their citizenship. Though the Muslims under different regimes in India have been discriminated against and were victims of communal violence – in fact, for all practical purposes, they were treated as secondary citizens of India, this is a concerted institutionalized attempt to strip them of their very citizenship.

If BJP is rolling out the NRC throughout the country then there are lessons to be drawn from the NRC process in Assam. The NRC process in Assam, having its roots in the simmering conflicts spanning decades, was a result of the opposition to migration, especially of Bengali-speaking Hindus and Muslims, which, over time, metamorphosed into opposition to Bangladeshi immigrants and all Muslims. Muslims were the primary targets, which manifested itself in the Nellie massacre. The NRC process, which required all the residents to produce a complicated labyrinth of documents of many generations of their family to prove that they are citizens of India, brought unspeakable misery to the Assamese. Apart from the colossal INR 1200 crores estimated spent on the exercise to eventually “identify” 1.9 million ‘foreigners’ – when exaggerated numbers of immigrants where pulled out of the hat without proper data – the human cost is criminal.

The fact finding mission in Assam, which the author was part of, witnessed and spoke to many college professors and teachers who were deployed over many years, some for 15 years till retirement, in the process of NRC. While education of an entire new generation of citizens took a backseat, the entire human resource was deployed in the machinery of NRC. The pervading paranoia and arbitrary exclusion on mere spelling mistakes or technical errors in the documents of the residents led to innocents committing suicides or being sent to detention centres, which for all practical purposes are like prisons. Innocent lives were upturned, leading to tearing apart of families, prospects of life in detention centres and loss of financial and mental wellbeing. The poor and illiterate had to queue up to supplicate before the authorities to include them in the NRC. Maintaining documents in a flood ravaged state is not easy and the Adivasis have no concept of documents to prove that the land they live on is theirs for generations. There are still remote areas which don’t even have hospitals to issue birth certificates.

An all India NRC would be many times worse. The NRC in the state of Assam alone required the involvement of over 50,000 government employees and cost more than Rs. 1,200 crore. This is a state that has less than 3% of the country’s total population (Shrivastava, 2019). One cannot even imagine the funds required to carry it out throughout India. This massive amount spent on this exercise, which is based on unsubstantiated and exaggerated fear and suspicion, will drive the entire country to a new level of paranoia. The poor and dispossessed will be supplicants before the authorities and at their mercy. Ironically, the very Hindus, who the CAA is supposed to protect, will be those queuing up in large numbers. If they want to protect their citizenship through CAA, they will have to prove persecution from one of the three neighbouring countries mentioned in the Act, which is almost impossible. Rightful citizens will have to declare themselves foreigners or refugees first. Thus, the NRC will spare nobody, though the Muslims will face brute open discrimination. All communities are at a risk of being stripped off their citizenship, as witnessed in Assam. The hardships are unimaginable.

How does CAA, coupled with the NRC, affect the country on a whole? These two instruments will change the paradigm of citizenship in India. So far, the citizenship of India was based on the principle of jus soli, which means acquiring citizenship of the country by virtue of being born there. The Citizenship Act, 1955 provided for all born on or before 1st July, 1987 being Indian citizens. Subsequently, citizenship can be acquired by descent, where one has to prove that one of their parents was a citizen of India. However, with CAA and NRC, the shift is towards the principle of jus sanguinis or blood system. By stating that India is the natural home for Hindus all over the world, the idea of Golwalkar that Hindus alone will enjoy all rights in India takes shape. This idea is similar to that of Israel, which calls Jews all over the world as its citizens. This goes against the very grain of multicultural societies, where people of different religions co-exist with equality. It, also, goes against the tenet of equality enshrined in our constitution, which ensures no discrimination on the basis of religion, caste, creed or gender. This is a change in the very idea of India. India was founded on the principle of composite nationalism, where citizens belonging to all faiths enjoyed the same citizenship rights. Their religion did not determine their citizenship. This is a dangerous turn to ethno-nationalism in Indian history, which will bring violence and unrest in the future.

The government reiterates that this Act only seeks to give refuge to those persecuted in the countries having a specific state religion. It is important to point out that, as much as we appreciate the humanitarian gesture of the government, the purpose of the Act will be lost if India is unable to provide refuge to all the other persecuted minorities in other neighbouring countries like Sri Lanka, which gives a special position to Buddhism in its Constitution, leading to reports of discrimination against Tamils and Muslims, or even Bhutan and Nepal, which have state religions. These inconsistencies along with its knee jerk design to protect its constituency, which votes it to power, makes its nefarious attempt very clear.

Today the country is burning in the face of brute power and arrogance of the ruling dispensation, which is pushing through an Act that was passed with no consultation and democratic spirit. Earlier, the ruling dispensation allowed issues like cow vigilantism, “love jihad”, ghar wapsi to foster hatred and ‘othering’ of Muslims and other vulnerable communities. This act is just another instrument to further this agenda. By all means, it will not be the last one. The Act betrays India and flays its soul by hurtling it down into the abyss of uncertainty, anxieties and injustice, knowing well the consequences of such acts. This ill-thought out and ill-intentioned Citizenship Amendment Act, and the imminent NRC that the Home Minister threatens the country with, has brought this country to the verge of unrest, which the world is taking notice of. The defiant government, which is turning a blind eye to protests, and the disproportionate force the protests are handled with, is giving a message that it cares less about democracy and is bent on redefining India, which will completely normalize bigotry and render its own millions of citizens stateless, in its thirst for power and its pursuit of the ideology of Hindu Rashtra. This Act, coupled with NRC, is unmistakably the first concrete step towards the cherished dream of BJP’s ideological parent, RSS. Unfortunately, the ruling party does not care if it is at loggerheads with the idea of India itself, and its long-cherished dream.

(Secular Perspective December 16-31, 2019)

RELATED ARTICLES:

1. Preparation for a genocide under way in India: Dr. Gregory Stanton
2. Stand Up for the Constitution #Scrap CAB 2019 #NoNRC say Indians!
3. The true cost of hailing the CAB
4. Assam’s Detention Camps are akin to Germany’s Concentration Camps: Thinkers
5. An all-India NRC, coupled with CAB aims to threaten, destabilise & stigmatise Indian Muslims: Arundhati Roy

The post Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019: The Fire that consumes India appeared first on SabrangIndia.

“The survival of democracy depends upon the getting rid of majoritarianism”, explained Prof. Prabhat Patnaik, prominent Marxist Economist and author, while delivering the 13^th Dr. Asghar Ali Engineer Memorial Lecture on 18^th November at Jamia Millia Ismailia (JMI) University in Delhi. The Memorial Lecture, chaired by Prof. Rajeev Bhargav, noted Indian political theorist, was organized by the Centre for Study of Society and Secularism (CSSS) in collaboration with the Department of Political Science at JMI. The Lecture was attended by over 200 students, academics, journalists, scholars and members of the civil society organizations. Prof. Furqan Ahmed, H ead of Political Science Dept. welcomed all the guests assembled, including eminent citizens – Mani Shankar Aiyar Prof. Zoya Hassan, Neshat Quaiser and Vijay Pratap Singh.

In the lecture titled, “Democracy versus Majoritarianism”, Prof. Patnaik, very lucidly presented a brilliant framework to understand the current political discourse in India grappling with the binary of majority and minority and the related divisive politics. Prof. Patnaik explained how majority and minority are constructed in a country and how majoritarianism seeks to limit the rights of the minority. He went on to elaborate the causes and supporting factors of majoritarianism and also how it can be and should be countered given its adverse ramifications on democracy. One of the primary reasons that the Lecture got a resounding applause and appreciation from the audience, apart from the erudite scholarship of Prof. Patnaik which reflected in his seamless delivery of the lecture, was the very relevance and direct connection it had with the socio-political and economic context unfolding in India which is marked by majoritarianism, intolerance to dissent, violence and exclusion against the vulnerable groups. Not only did he deconstruct the terms majority, minority and majoritarianism, he also suggested possible ways to arrest majoritarianism through meticulous analysis and calculations.

At the very outset, Prof. Patnaik while defining majority and minority, made a distinction between the constructed or created notion of majority and minority against the empirical notion of majority and minority. The construction is deliberate and planned as opposed to spontaneous, he clarified. He explained that this political formation of majority and minority are created to abridge the rights of the minority in the name of the majority. This abridgement or violations of the rights of the minority is attributed to the “retribution” for the “sins” that the conceptually-created “minority” is supposed to have committed or be committing. This analysis of Prof. Patnaik resonates with the demonization and hysteria created against the minorities in the country and justifying it by referring to the alleged cruelty of Mughal rulers.

But does this frenzy whipped up against the minority and the tirade berating the minority really ameliorate the condition of the majority or have tangible gains for the majority? One often wonders to what end is this hatred propagated which claims many innocent lives and tears apart the social fabric. The answer to this question was provided by Prof. Patnaik who said that abridging the rights of the minority precludes any actual or material benefit to the majority. This position is explained again by two reasons- firstly, material benefit like jobs and opportunities is not the concern of majoritarian project and secondly, the rights of the very group that is the minority that it seeks to abridge is marginalized and already disempowered. Thus, abridging the rights of the minority creates no space or more opportunities in favor of the majority. This is a point well made when the narrative that is sought to be pushed is that there is a historical conflict of interest between the minority and majority in India. Prof. Patnaik also cleared up another misconception that majoritarianism doesn’t seek to displace a privileged minority from its position of privilege and thus doesn’t have an agenda of social justice or democracy.

Prof. Patnaik pointed out that though the majoritarianism would seek the support of the majority to abridge the rights of the minority, in reality it doesn’t necessarily enjoy the support of the majority. Yet the majoritarian agenda is promoted due to some loopholes in our electoral system which enables the political party getting the largest number of votes instead of getting a majority in terms of votes to form the government. He gave an example of the BJP, which though polled only 38 percent of votes and not majority votes has still managed to form a government under this electoral system. This brings us to another question that if the support of the majority and also absolute majority in terms of votes in the electoral system are not essential for majoritarianism then how does it thrive? Prof. Patnaik dealt with this question in two parts. He said that majoritarianism arises out of conducive social context. This specific social context he points out is economic crisis and has economic roots. Though in his formulation, he precluded any material benefit for the majority from majoritarianism, he emphasized that unemployment and the precipitating economic crisis is a fertile ground for spreading the agenda of majoritarianism especially if a narrative which blames this economic crisis on the minority is given impetus.

In the second part of the answer as to how majoritarianism thrives, he explained the use of instruments which aid it. One example given already is of the lacuna in the electoral system. The others, he mentioned are the fear and insecurity amongst the people. Fear and insecurity are promoted through draconian sedition laws like the UAPA which are aimed at silencing all dissent, demands for civil liberties and human rights. This has resulted in only one sided narratives to be allowed in public discourse, couched in hypernationalism and vilification of the minorities which amplifies the silence due to fear of attracting the seditious laws. And finally, the third instrument which aids the thriving of majoritarianism, is the support of the corporate- financial oligarchy. This kind of support brings in massive funding for political parties. Prof. Patnaik gave the example of BJP which spent a reported Rs.27000 crores in the last parliamentary election, which averages to about Rs.50 crores per constituency. This nexus also controls the media. All these instruments can be categorized as control over the state. Control over the state makes it easier for the promotion of the agenda of majoritarianism which makes it absolutely crucial to select a political party with scruples to govern the country and which doesn’t use state power to the end of majoritarianism.

The most crucial part of Prof. Patnaik’s Lecture which had import on the way forward for any democracy and especially the Indian democracy which is coming to terms with the challenge of majoritarianism, was the steps to arrest majoritarianism at different levels. First measure he suggested was tactical alliances that should be forged by all political forces to uphold democracy. The convergence points for forge such unity could be the opposition to  undemocratic practices, like using the CBI or the ED against political opponents, removing sedition laws and other such draconian legislation from the statute books, and curbing the menace of lynch-mobs. But at the same time, he cautioned that merely forming alliances for electoral success is not the only solution. The very conjuncture that produces majoritarianism has to be changed.

This conjuncture of majoritarianism can be changed in a number of ways. One way is to revisit the Karachi Congress Resolution 1931, which explicitly discusses the idea of the new India. This resolution was also an embodiment of anti-colonial nationalism and the inclusive nationalism on which independent India was founded on. Prof. Patnaik emphasized on the characteristics of this anti-colonial nationalism- that it was inclusive wherein it accommodates all sections of the society, it was not imperialistic where it did not seek hegemony over its people and finally it did not put the nation above its people, it gave primacy to the welfare of the people. Today India needs this nationalism and not the jingoistic nationalism which has gained prominence.

 Second way to change the conjuncture of majoritarianism, he suggested, was to expand the fundamental rights given in the Constitution to include justiciable economic rights.  He explained that currently, economic rights are part of the directive principles of state policy and are not justiciable. However as Ambedkar had also lamented, Prof. Patnaik observed that political democracy can’t be realized without economic democracy. To overcome this dichotomy, economic rights that ensure minimum standard of living to everyone must be made justiciable. He went on to explain the different arguments that are raised to demonstrate how economic rights are not workable, one of them being the lack of capacity of the economy to support this expenditure. But he insisted that democracy and welfare of the citizens must take precedence over the economic order which benefits capitalists.

Prof. Patnaik substantiated his argument in favour of justiciable economic rights by providing a calculation he has arrived at for raising needed finances. According to him, in order to ensure five economic rights, namely, right to food, right to livelihood, right to free quality healthcare, the right to free public education of quality at least up to the secondary level to start with, and the right to adequate non-contributory universal old-age pension and disability benefits, 11.76 lakh crores will have to be raised over and above the present expenditure on these heads.  Raising 11.76 lakh crores he said was possible by implementing two measures- firstly by imposing two percent of wealth tax on the one percent of the top rich and secondly by imposing 33 per cent tax on the inheritance that is passed down each year by these one per cent of wealth-holders. He explained that capitalism demands that the capitalist earns profits himself accruing to his own merit and not enjoy inheritance. Thus, taxing inheritance is plausible way of raising the needed finance.

Finally, Prof. Patnaik cautioned that India which moving towards facism from majoritarianism and this is posing a formidable challenge in Indian democracy. In order to nurture Indian democracy, it is essential that there is an all inclusive nationalism like the anti-colonial nationalism which is starkly opposite from the Hindutva- hypernationalism. Prof. Rajeev Bhargav while appreciating the formulations presented by Prof. Patnaik, also reiterated that there are two notions of majority and minority- preference based and electoral based and these notions are temporary. Minority doesn’t imply necessarily numerical strength or the lack of it but attributed the construction of minority to the deprivation of power to shape the political culture and realization of their rights. He also emphasized on the salience of community rights based on egalitarianism in India which has layers of hierarchy.

The audience was captivated by the sheer smooth and powerful lecture by Prof. Patnaik which in all its wisdom analyzed the constructs of majority and minority in India in all its nuances. He dealt with the question of majoritarianism and the concern of its undermining democracy at multiple levels in all its complexities. This analysis of the economic root of majoritarianism in a time where the deteriorating Indian economy is impoverishing millions was well appreciated. His solutions to counter the threat of majoritarianism were innovative and promote the democratic agenda for a better India. The Lecture was very inspiring, invigorating and encouraging for the organizers as well as the audience. Dr. Asghar Ali Engineer Memorial Lectures have been delivered in the past by eminent scholars including Romila Thapar, Christophe Jaffrelot, Akeel Bilgrami and Sukhdeo Thorat.

The post Majoritarianism doesn’t enhance rights or material benefits of majority community: Prabhat Patnaik appeared first on SabrangIndia.

“Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that”- Martin Luther King Jr.

While many wise persons through the centuries the world over have spoken about love and its transformative value, in India, the message of love has been passed down from generation to generation by different saints. But one saint- poet that stands out is Kabir. Kabir, through his teachings, poetry and life became the most influential proponent of the value of love. And his message has left a deep imprint on the culture and philosophy in India. 28^th June, 2018 marked the 500^th death anniversary of the mystic poet, reformer and saint. Kabir’s ideas are as relevant and revolutionary today as they were during his times. Through this article, the author attempts to revisit the message of Kabir in the present context and the complex challenges it poses.

Kabir has a huge following in northern India across communities. He is quoted by scholars and laypersons alike. The Prime Minister of India is no exception. On the occasion of Kabir Jayanti, PM Modi slammed the opposition by pointing out to their lust and greed for power. “Those who opposed Emergency are trying to form alliances with the Congress. It showed their lust for power and lack of principles. Some political parties do not want peace and harmony in society. Such people are cut off from ground realities”, he said (The Pioneer, 2018) . Quoting Kabir’s famous doha to emphasis on his government’s promise of sabka saath, sabka vikas (development for all), he said, “Kabir khada bazaar mein, maang raha sabki khair, na kahe sae dosti, na keh sake bair” (Stood in a marketplace, Kabir wishes all well. Looking neither for a friend, nor for an enemy) (The Pioneer, 2018.) It is rather interesting to see that the ruling dispensation is invoking Kabir, an iconic thinker and prime example of communal harmony in India, when the General Elections 2019 are nearing. Nonetheless let us take this opportunity to examine the tall claims that the government has incorporated the message of Kabir in their policies against Kabir’s own philosophy and teachings.
 

Kabir’s ideas:

Kabir, a saint-poet, was one of the tallest figures of the Bhakti movement in India. Though his birth year is contested, he is believed to be the contemporary of Sikandar Lodhi. It is believed he was born in a Hindu family but raised by Muslim weaver family. He grew up to be a mystic poet in Varanasi where he sharply critiqued not only the inequality and social hierarchy in the Hindu philosophy but also the orthodoxy in Islam. Through his life and dohas, he encourages others to think critically about social hierarchies and embrace love, compassion and honest introspection of self and the world. Kabir’s fundamental message is love. One of his most famous dohas which encapsulates this message so beautifully is: Poti padh padh kar jag mua, Pandit bhayo na koye, dhai akshar prem ke, jo padhe so Pandit hoye (scholars were never made from reading countless books, but the one who understands love is greater than any learned scholar).

Though, the message of love seems to be simplistic yet it is revolutionary for the times torn by conflicts, identity politics and inequalities. The time he was living in was marked by the dominance of Brahmins, rigid religious traditions, rituals and customs, feudal laws and orthodoxy. These hierarchies and rigidity were an anathema to love and humanism which Kabir sought to underline. Kabir, in response, provides a broad overarching framework of love, compassion and mysticism which was extraordinary yet rebellious in a way that defied tradition. He urged the people to re-imagine a world order based on honest introspection and beyond materialistic aspect. He had an alternative socio-political vision characterized by transcendence, humility and spirituality marked by submission which comes across clearly through his dohas. “Kabira Garv Na Keejiye, Uncha Dekh Aavaas, Kaal Pairon Punyah Letna, Uper Jamsi Ghaas.” (Kabir, don’t be so proud and vain, living in your high mansion. Tomorrow, you’ll be lying beneath the ground, with grass growing on top that animals will chew).

One aspect of Kabir that can’t be ignored is that he was not just a saint- poet but also a reformer and his contribution in this area needs more elaboration. As mentioned above, he was against the social hierarchies and injustice and thus has a large following amongst the Dalits even today. He critiqued the dogmas and superstitions in the Hindu philosophy. One example of where he took on the orthodoxy and defied tradition was his decision to move to Maghar from Kashi (Benaras). While Kashi is a holy city for the Hindus and the belief is that it is a gate way to heaven, it is believed that Maghar is a gateway to hell. In order to explain his move he says,

“Kya Kaasi, Kya Ookhar Maghar Ram Riday Jao Hoi” – “What’s the difference between Kashi and a barren Maghar when divinity resides within?” (Singh, 2018)

Similarly, Kabir tore into the orthodoxy of Islam too. He bitterly criticized the rituals and rigidity in Islam. Criticizing the clergy, he says,

“Mullah, why so loudly Do you call? Ram-Rahim vibrates in all. I wonder Who your Lord is! Mullah in the mosque Calls out so loud, Is your Lord deaf.”

He advocated the oneness of God. This God can be realized through devotion to God without the need of any pandit or mullahs (priests). He rejected organized religion and emphasized on a humanistic approach towards religion.
 

Relevance of Kabir today:

The need for Kabir’s vision and love is acutely felt in today’s polarized society. The fault lines in our society are been sharpened along the divides of caste and religion. Identities based on religion and castes are entrenched fracturing social cohesion and social justice. The State which is duty bound to promote equality, fraternity and liberty of all citizens has failed to do so. However, some phenomena that are taking place in the country which needs to be discussed in the light of the teachings of Kabir. One of the most serious is the prevailing caste system.

Kabir against social hierarchies:

Somewhat direct criticism of caste system by Kabir can be found in these couplets:
 
If you say you’re a Brahmin, Born of a mother who’s a Brahmin, Was there a special canal, through which you were born?”
“Were the Creator, Concerned about caste, we’d arrive in the world With a caste mark on the forehead.” (Rumi, 2015)
 
The Dalits in India are still violently denied the equal opportunities and rights inspite of the constitutional provisions. The dominant Hindutva politics which also shapes the policies of the ruling dispensation upholds the caste system and the hierarchy it seeks. Atrocities against Dalits are common news in the media almost every day. Ghastly violence is perpetrated against Dalits on account of reasons like marrying persons from upper castes, using wells or roads used by the upper castes, wearing new clothes or showing any sign of wealth or sporting a moustache- all these actions considered as prerogatives and privileges of the upper castes.

One is compelled to then think if Kabir’s teaching on equality is what the ruling dispensation really adhere to? The violence against Dalits is not merely physical assaults by one off individuals. These assaults are manifestations of the deep-rooted hatred and mindset of the society which still believes in the notion of inferiority based on pollution. To add to this dehumanizing idea, is the concoction of nationalism that is promoted by the right-wing extremists which makes cow holy and which justifies and normalizes violence against Dalits. Dalits and others are severely punished on the suspicion of cow slaughter. Cow becomes a religious symbol to be revered and protected over human beings. This symbolism and ritualism is precisely what Kabir sought to counter. He wonderfully captures the need to self-introspect and not project hatred towards others in the following couplets:

Bura dekhan main Chala, bura naa milya koye, jo mann khoya aapna, toh Mujhsa bura naa koye
(I set out to find flawed men and couldn’t find any, when I finally peered inside myself though, there was nobody more flawed than me!)
 

Kabir- A Bridge between Cultures:

The iconoclastic saint, Kabir, is a symbol of syncretic culture in India. Kabir didn’t identify himself as a Hindu or a Muslim. He renounced the orthodoxy in both religions.

Chahe geeta bachiye ya padhiye quran, tera mera pyaar hi har pustak ka gyaan!
(Whether one reads the Geeta or the Quran, all holy texts essentially speak of love)

 “My one God is devoid of all attributes; He is neither Hindu nor Muslim; I perform no puja nor namaz”
“Brother, where have these Gods come from; who has misled you; Allah, Ram, Karim, Keshav Hari, Hazrat, they are all the names of The One” (Mukhia, 2015)
For Kabir, love and compassion for all was more important. However, one can’t say that this legacy of love is carried out untainted in India today. The social fabric of India is under immense tension due to communal violence, distrust, hatred and overwhelming stigmatization of communities based on religious identities. The boundaries of religious identities are hardening creating political binaries. The dominant discourse that is being promoted is that of homogeneity. The Hindutva ideology which proclaims that Hindus are the original and rightful citizens of the country has set its own standards and litmus test for nationalism. Its idea of nationalism is based on upper caste Hindu traditions and negates the pluralism firstly in Hinduism itself and secondly in culture of India which has borrowed from different religions and traditions.

Kabir’s teachings as opposed to the below, provide space for inclusion of multiple narratives because he recognized multiple truths. The Hindutva supremacists attempt to shrink this inclusive space and uphold one narrative of homogenization. This is being manifested in the constant vicious attack on Muslims in the form of mob lynching and also attacking or discrediting the contribution of the Muslim community to Indian culture. For example, the history of India is sought to be rewritten or renaming of roads and monuments named after Muslim rulers.

This hatred is spread to an extent that there are 60 violent incidents of lynching according to the India Spend report from 2010 to 2017 (Abraham & Rao, 2017). Most of these incidents have taken place in BJP ruled states. The most recent incident took place in Hapur in Uttar Pradesh in June 2018. Two Muslim men, Qasim and Samayuddin were attacked by a mob allegedly over rumors of cow slaughter. Qasim who was brutally attacked was seen dragged by the mob in the presence of the UP police and succumbed to injuries. Samayuddin was also seen pleading with the mob which was unrelenting. This case unfortunately is not unique in its brutality. Such cases of mob lynching starting from Mohammad Akhlaq in Dadri to Afrazul in Rajsamand have been heart wrenching tale of inhumanity and pure hatred. In Dadri, the call to attack Mohammad Akhlaq was given from the temple!

If the government was indeed forging forward on the message of Kabir, it would have worked on multiple levels to arrest this trend. On one level there would be an honest quest for justice. Here the state is levelling charges against the victims instead of the perpetrators. On another level, it would work for social harmony and cohesion by treating all religions equally. Hindu Rashtra influenced by Hindutva would not be the stated objective of the ruling dispensation which is directly antithetical to “Sabka Saath Sabka Vikas”.

It is unfortunate if not surprising that BJP seeks to appropriate Kabir given his colossal legacy and following amongst the marginalized. A similar attempt is made to appropriate Ambedkar and other tall leaders by the Party for electoral gains. However, one hopes that Kabir’s ideas are remembered in earnest and not for political gains. His idea of love has the power to work as an antidote to the violence that is sought to be normalized and polarization that is prevailing in the society. Kabir’s deep spirituality which rests on love and self-introspection offers an alternative to bigotry and hatred spread under the name of religion and caste. He defied traditions to imagine and construct a vision of the society based on love, devotion and humility. This also demands courage to see the truth and accept multiple truths- include and love others. This humanist approach to society will help us to remould our society to make it more humane and harmonious.

Perhaps this last couplet will better convey his message of this courage, transcendence and love:

Bhala hua meri matki phoot gaye mein to paaneeyan bharan se choot gaye

(Thank you Lord! That this pitcher is broken, no more filling it up, no more guards now and worries none)

This article was first published in Secular Perspective July 1-15, 2018.
 

The post Kabir: Love, Mysticism and an Alternative Vision appeared first on SabrangIndia.