Extremism does not pay
Friday, May 29, 2009
Editorial, Dawn, Pakistan
By Asghar Ali Engineer
Friday, 29 May, 2009
RELIGION is basically a spiritual experience and must be valued as such. Politics, on the other hand, is a game of power which is often played with no holds barred.
Truly religious persons who are inspired by core religious teachings and fundamental values should critique the power holders who do not deliver rather than becoming power wielders themselves. When religious organisations or personalities become participants in the power game they betray religious teachings and create fanaticism, arousing extreme emotions to better their chances of winning the power game.
We have seen in Islamic history how the controversy about the ‘createdness’ of the Quran was used by Abbasid rulers to win the power game. They persecuted eminent theologians who refused to endorse their doctrine of the ‘createdness’ of the Quran. Similarly, in our own time we see the phenomenon of fundamentalism and terrorism, fuelled by the politicisation of religion. All religions stand on ethical and moral foundations and the power game is often won by weakening this base.
Imam Abu Hanifa refused to accept the office of the chief qazi under the Abbasids because he feared that he would have to endorse the misdeeds of the rulers; he did not want to pollute his pure soul. He withstood all coercion, including a cruel prison term imposed by the caliph, but he did not accept the office offered to him.
How can one critique the powerful (mustakbirun) and stand by the weaker sections of society (mustadifin) if one becomes part of a ruling establishment? Those who run after power can never be truly religious in spirit. The Sufis kept themselves aloof from power when they saw how religion was becoming a tool of the powerful, and destroying all values. When a Delhi sultan wanted to visit Nizamuddin Auliya in his hospice he told Khusro there were two doors to his hospice; if the sultan entered from one, he would leave from the other.
Religion should never be politicised. Its politicisation produces disastrous results. In recent years, the Indian polity was thoroughly communalised by the BJP using the Ram Mandir–Babri Masjid controversy. It brought unprecedented communal polarisation in India. Demolition of the Babri Masjid was followed by communal riots in Mumbai and several other places. It was Mr Advani who was the architect of this controversy which paid him short-term dividends but with disastrous consequences for the longer term.
In the recently concluded Indian elections, the people reasserted their case for a secular polity. The election results came as a pleasant surprise for many and as a shock for communal forces. The people do not want extremists and communalists; they want moderates who can address their problems. Yes, it is also true that once in a while the people’s religious emotions can be played up but the masses soon see the political misuse of religion and stop responding to such forces.
Mr Advani was all ready to take over as prime minister and the media was repeatedly referring to him as a favourite. We were holding our breath. If in this election communal forces had come to power, not only would secular values have suffered, many secular institutions would have been infiltrated by communal forces which in turn would have weakened India’s secular democracy, if not destroyed it.
However, not much credit goes to the Congress for winning these elections. The credit rests with the people of India. The BJP was a bit unsure how much the Hindutva factor would pay but was under pressure from extremists to use Hindutva as a main plank and when Mr Varun Gandhi made a highly communal speech in Pilibhit, UP, from where he was to be nominated as a BJP candidate, BJP leaders saw in it an opportunity. Even Mr Advani, who was posing as a moderate in order to become prime minister, rushed to support Varun Gandhi and ignored the Election Commission’s notice not to nominate him as a candidate in view of his highly communal speech. But the BJP went ahead and nominated him.
Many BJP leaders after the results said that it was a mistake and that they should not have backed Varun Gandhi. It sent a wrong message to the people. Similarly, the BJP banked much on Narendra Modi who is not only an extremist but also directly responsible for massacring 2,000 Muslims in Gujarat. BJP leaders thought he was an asset and was much in demand for the campaigning. In fact, he became a liability. BJP analysts later maintained that they lost the elections because of him.
Let us learn a lesson from history and not allow politicians to play with our religious sentiments and emotions.
The writer is an Islamic scholar who also heads the Centre for Study of Society & Secularism, Mumbai.
Source
By Asghar Ali Engineer
Friday, 29 May, 2009
RELIGION is basically a spiritual experience and must be valued as such. Politics, on the other hand, is a game of power which is often played with no holds barred.
Truly religious persons who are inspired by core religious teachings and fundamental values should critique the power holders who do not deliver rather than becoming power wielders themselves. When religious organisations or personalities become participants in the power game they betray religious teachings and create fanaticism, arousing extreme emotions to better their chances of winning the power game.
We have seen in Islamic history how the controversy about the ‘createdness’ of the Quran was used by Abbasid rulers to win the power game. They persecuted eminent theologians who refused to endorse their doctrine of the ‘createdness’ of the Quran. Similarly, in our own time we see the phenomenon of fundamentalism and terrorism, fuelled by the politicisation of religion. All religions stand on ethical and moral foundations and the power game is often won by weakening this base.
Imam Abu Hanifa refused to accept the office of the chief qazi under the Abbasids because he feared that he would have to endorse the misdeeds of the rulers; he did not want to pollute his pure soul. He withstood all coercion, including a cruel prison term imposed by the caliph, but he did not accept the office offered to him.
How can one critique the powerful (mustakbirun) and stand by the weaker sections of society (mustadifin) if one becomes part of a ruling establishment? Those who run after power can never be truly religious in spirit. The Sufis kept themselves aloof from power when they saw how religion was becoming a tool of the powerful, and destroying all values. When a Delhi sultan wanted to visit Nizamuddin Auliya in his hospice he told Khusro there were two doors to his hospice; if the sultan entered from one, he would leave from the other.
Religion should never be politicised. Its politicisation produces disastrous results. In recent years, the Indian polity was thoroughly communalised by the BJP using the Ram Mandir–Babri Masjid controversy. It brought unprecedented communal polarisation in India. Demolition of the Babri Masjid was followed by communal riots in Mumbai and several other places. It was Mr Advani who was the architect of this controversy which paid him short-term dividends but with disastrous consequences for the longer term.
In the recently concluded Indian elections, the people reasserted their case for a secular polity. The election results came as a pleasant surprise for many and as a shock for communal forces. The people do not want extremists and communalists; they want moderates who can address their problems. Yes, it is also true that once in a while the people’s religious emotions can be played up but the masses soon see the political misuse of religion and stop responding to such forces.
Mr Advani was all ready to take over as prime minister and the media was repeatedly referring to him as a favourite. We were holding our breath. If in this election communal forces had come to power, not only would secular values have suffered, many secular institutions would have been infiltrated by communal forces which in turn would have weakened India’s secular democracy, if not destroyed it.
However, not much credit goes to the Congress for winning these elections. The credit rests with the people of India. The BJP was a bit unsure how much the Hindutva factor would pay but was under pressure from extremists to use Hindutva as a main plank and when Mr Varun Gandhi made a highly communal speech in Pilibhit, UP, from where he was to be nominated as a BJP candidate, BJP leaders saw in it an opportunity. Even Mr Advani, who was posing as a moderate in order to become prime minister, rushed to support Varun Gandhi and ignored the Election Commission’s notice not to nominate him as a candidate in view of his highly communal speech. But the BJP went ahead and nominated him.
Many BJP leaders after the results said that it was a mistake and that they should not have backed Varun Gandhi. It sent a wrong message to the people. Similarly, the BJP banked much on Narendra Modi who is not only an extremist but also directly responsible for massacring 2,000 Muslims in Gujarat. BJP leaders thought he was an asset and was much in demand for the campaigning. In fact, he became a liability. BJP analysts later maintained that they lost the elections because of him.
Let us learn a lesson from history and not allow politicians to play with our religious sentiments and emotions.
The writer is an Islamic scholar who also heads the Centre for Study of Society & Secularism, Mumbai.
Source
Labels: India, Politico- Religious, Politics, Religion
posted @ 7:00 PM,
0 Comments:
Post a Comment