I have always refrained from commenting on any Hindu Muslim issues. One reason is that I am in a Government job and hence must remain impartial and secular in my approach to religious issues. The other more important reason is that no one ever reads an article on Hindu Muslim issue without judging the faith of the author. As my name makes it amply clear, I am a born Hindu and hence my views are bound to be judged by that parameter. Nevertheless, the recent events in Pakistan (killing of school children), controversy over the movie PK, avoiding a Hindu Muslim riot in my subdivision and most lately the killing of Charlie Hebdo editor and cartoonists have forced me to pause and ponder on what's going on?
First of all, about the riot that didn't take place in my subdivision. It so happened that a Muslim boy shared a pic on Facebook and whatsapp in which the face of Lord Hanuman was morphed on to the bikini-clad body of some random model in a picture. The Hindu Right in this city were quick to make this a huge issue and with the apprehension that a small mistake might erupt into a big riot, the boy was swiftly arrested by the police and relevant sections of the IPC were imposed on him and he was put in custody. We thought that the issue was over. Nevertheless, the Hindus (specifically the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and the local RSS body) informed us of a Bandh that they had decided to call in protest of the actions of the boy. Later in the day, some Muslims, claiming to be family members of the erring boy came to me and begged forgiveness for the act done by their boy. I called both the parties and asked them to end the matter henceforth. However, the Bandh still happened and we were on our toes the whole day fearing that the issue might grow bigger. Thanks to the show of force and the passive reaction of the Muslims, nothing unfortunate happened.
In a similar event, while removing encroachments by shops on roads, we broke 40 shops which were situated in a Kabristan. We had also by then removed about 100 shops of Hindu Shopkeepers. But since the Kabristan belonged to the Waqf board, the issue took a big turn, and our office is busy replying to complaints of using unnecessary force on innocent minorities. Amusingly, a lot of Muslims also appreciated our act of liberating the Kabristaan from shops but there is an active political segment which is sending us legal notices of all possible kinds.
None of these two issues became violent and so non of these became a news big enough to be read outside this city. But these issues did highlight the significance of the Hindu Muslim issue to me. Recently there have been hot debates on how Aamir Khan has mocked Hindu Gods in the movie PK. This taunt totally ignore the fact that Raju Hirani and the author of the movie are both Hindus. People say that the Pakistani was shown as benign, but they miss pointing out that a bomb blast is shown in the name of protecting Allah. The attack on the schoolkids is so barbarous that even the most devout Muslim is unable to digest it as any form of Jehad. The killing of Charles Hebdo guys is equally disturbing. Then there has also been the news of reverse Conversions and Love Jehads etc.
When Hindu fundamentalists attempt to take an extremist stand, a lot of liberal Hindus protest it quite vociferously. Sadly, when an Islamic Terror attack happens, the liberal Muslims are not so vocal in protesting. Yet, I am not ready to agree that religion is the core of the problem. Once Gandhi when lamented by the RSS for being pro-Muslim replied, "I am a Hindu, and a Muslim, and a Sikh, and a Christian", Mohd Ali Jinnah quickly commented, "Only a Hindu can say that." This, I think, is the essence of Hinduism put most concisely. Hindu, by its very nature and origin, is a secular religion. Here the use of secular is not in the European sense of 'non-religious' but in the Indian sense of Communal Harmony.
Hindu is not a united community, nor a single religion. The Tamil Dravidians do not get offended when Devi Saraswati is painted by M F Hussain, nor is the Bengali Hindu concerned about the over hyped vegetarianism by Tamil and UP Hindus. My mother does not know what the story of Vaishno Devi is, but she sure does know that Bhagwati, if displeased, can cause chickenpox. My sister, who was born in a Maithil Brahmin Family is married to a Tamil Brahmin. Neither her mother-in-law recognizes the Gauri that my sister worships, nor my Mom knows who Murugan or Balaji is. I am married to a Gurudwara going Hindu, whose grandma finds all Pandits as cheats, while my Mom doesn't have a clue what is worshipped in a Gurudwara. Diversity is the essence of India, or may be its reason to exist. Any other country with so much diversity has not been able to survive without giving birth to new nations.
So is the case with Muslims. The Arab Muslim hates the Irani Muslim. The Afghan Muslim will never marry his daughter to a Baloch Muslim. The Syed of Lucknow doesn't know the Moplah of Kerela. Shias and Sunnis in Bhopal killed each other more mercilessly than Muslims killed Hindus in any riot. The Benagli Muslim of Bangladesh did not live in harmony with the Punjabi Muslim of Pakistan, while the Bihari Muslim is living in full peace with the Bihari Hindu.
The point that I am trying to make is that people are bound to form groups, get emotional about it and get in violent conflict in the name of those groups. Hence the issue is not whether the conflict is religious, political or ethnic. The issue is also not of never letting a conflict happen as that is plain impossible. The issue is of tolerance. I saw the picture of Lord Hanuman on a bikini clad movie, and honestly I laughed. I saw PK and so did my religiously devout mom and we both laughed. Point is did some Muslims too did not just laugh at the Charles Hebdo cartoon? I find conversions as well as 'Ghar Wapasi' as worthless and pointless and I laugh at both. The Oraon of Chotanagpur remains an Oraon, whether baptised or wearing a janeu around him.
Whatever may be the cause of all the terrorism and fundametalism all around, it is not religion for sure. It is politics and like always reliogion is being used to justify politics? Why so? Because Politics can be questioned by logic and reason while Religion can't be challenged by reason or logic. When the Spartans defended against the Persians, they said, 'May the Gods be with us.' When Troy was attacked, Achilles destroyed the temple of Apollo. When armies of Gangetic plain attacked the dravidians, they saw their own Gods as Gods and the Gods of Dravidians as Demons. When Jinnah wanted a Pakistan, he invoked religion. When Dara Shikoh was killed by Aurangzeb, his real brother, it was justified in the name of protecting Islam. When Kashmir burnt, it was in the name of Islam and when Punjab burned, it was in the name of the Akal Takht and Khalistan.
Religion has always been used to legitimize political violence, whether it is the loot of Somnath temple by Mahmud of Ghazni or the fight of territory between Shivaji and Aurangzeb. Same is true for ISIS in Iraq and for the US attacks on Islamic countries Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq. Hindi author Kamleshwar, in his classic book 'Kitne Pakistan' beautifully shows how personal political ambitions were justified in the name of religion. The killers of the Charles Hebdo journalists shouted they were avenging the Mohammed. Laughable it is to see men, who claim to protect the Gods, for is it not the God who created them?
The acts of violence of some people against some other people has always happened in human society and will always happen. And with my little exposure of the field that I have had, I realized that hardly a bunch of few 'religious contractors' are worried about the religion. The guys who protested against the Hanuman obscene cartoon are also the ones who wanted to sabotage the Dussehra festival bacause they were not being given prominence. The people who are protesting the removal of shops from Waqf land are also the same people whose source of personal income was from setting up illegal shops on the 'Pak Kabra' of their ancestors. When I deal with these 'goons' as an officer, I try telling myself that this guy here is a goon, and not a Hindu or a Muslim. His aims are political and not religious. And when I beat up such a guy, neither the Hindu Gods nor Allah gets offended.
These goons thrive on the innocence with which people adhere to any instruction latched in the garb of religion. The sad part is that while the Hindus in India are not ready to be fooled by these goons, Muslims across the world are not putting up a strong campaign against such goons. If it is said that Although all Muslims are not Terrorists but all Terrorists are Muslims, it is because the liberal Muslims have given up on their extremist brethren. The reason why Hindu fundamentalist have still not been able to totally create a Hindu Terror is that because the liberal Hindus always outnumber and outspeak the extremist Hindus. The ills of polytheism, no-single-book and diversity of language and rituals have been the blessings in disguise for Hinduism as a religion. Somehow the Sufi, Urdu loving poetic Muslim is not speaking up enough against that terrorist holding the gun and submitting to it as if it is holier than Quran. It is high time the Islamic Liberals speak up and show that they can protect their religion from this implosion of terrorism.