By Badre Alam & Sanjay Kumar,
Since the emergence of incipient nation-state, India’s minorities had suffered from the trauma of partition and subsequent event of communal incidences, which have continued even today. In other words, after the partition, the future of minorities in India was replete with history of ‘riots after riots’. How can historic communal attacks on minorities like , Bhagalpur riots, Babri Masjid demolition that followed consequent riots in different places and more importantly, Gujarat carnage (2002) could be forgotten, which had created ground for weakening of the composite culture and diversity of Indian society. At the same time the emergence of hard core Hindu nationalist party like BJP and RSS combine have had added fuel to communal feelings and hatred among the Hindus against the Indian Muslims.
But it is very unfortunate that secular and progressive section of society have utterly failed to stop the nefarious act of communal polarization unleashed by the right-wing forces. In short, one could argue that the martial deprivations of Indian Muslims are directly linked to the increasing incidence of communal violence in India. To put differently, it is not wrong to say that State and its institutions along with civil society groups have in fact failed to safeguard and protect interests of minority community against the onslaught of Hindutva forces.
In what follows, the writers intend to discuss and highlights the manner in which RSS and BJP have both responded to the minority question in India. While criticising the RSS, we argue that their understanding of minority question are untenable historically, because of given cultural plurality and diversity of Indian Society. In this essay, we contest the views of RSS on minority rights by citing the writings of Dr Ambedkar and others. In second section, we also briefly touch upon the recent attacks (by VHP and BJP) on Vice-President Hamid Ansari with regards to his understanding of Muslims problems in India. To illustrate points further, we argue that Anasri’s views on Indian Muslims, Islam, democracy and secularism needs to be understood properly. In short, contrary to BJP and VHP views, we argue that Ansari’s speech (at the Golden Jubilee celebration of Majilis-e-Mushawarat) have given some theoretical insights to engage with minority question in India.
In this essay, we do not intent to defend the politics of anyone but, our concern is to seriously discuss the points made by Ansari and thereby expose the politics of RSS with insight of academic writings. We here argue that, in case of Ansari, Hindu right wing organisations deliberately raised this controversy to divide Hindus and Muslims on communal lines, to get electoral and political mileage in the context of Bihar Assembly election, which is going to take place soon. Before coming to current problems, let us discus the RSS ideologue’s views on minority question.
RSS and minorities: Critique
Recent attacks on minority communities by RSS and VHP including in the case of Hamid Ansari could be better understood, if one could unpack the views of their Hindutva ideologue on religious minorities. It is not new and in fact rooted in the history of Hindutva politics. In this regard, it would be appropriate to explore and unfold the historical documents produced by the ideologue of cultural Hindu nationalists; one could easily find that how they had created and define the Indian Islam and Muslim as an ‘other’. To elaborate further, let us unpack the RSS ideologue views on minorities as discussed by eminent scholars.
Late noted Scholar Asghar Ali Engineer has clearly demonstrated the views of Hinduvta ideologue on Muslims and Christians. As he mentioned:
‘’Guru Golwalkar who succeeded Dr. Hedgewar, treated Muslims and Christians as ‘foreigners’ and ‘aliens’. He [Golwalkar]wrote that they (i.e. Muslims and Christians) came to this country as ‘guests’ and that guests should not overstay and go back to their own countries’’. (Asghar Ali Engineer, The RSS an evolution from the minority perspective’, in Secular Perspective, April 16-30, 2001.p.1).
To expose the myth of RSS on minorities, further Engineer has pointed out:
‘The assumption here is that all Muslims and Christians came from outside as invaders and rulers. The fact is that most of the Muslims and Christians are converts from dalits and backward Hindu castes. They inherit their poverty, illiteracy, backwardness and even skin of their colour from their Hindu ancestors’. ( Engineer: 2001:1).
Endorsing the views of former Hindutva ideologue, recently RSS Chief Mohan Bhagwat and General Secretary Suresh Bhaiyyaji Joshi also said about minority, while addressing the inaugural session of Akhil Bharatiya Pratinidhi Sabha (ABPS) at Dr. Hedgewar Smarak Premises in Nagpur, Maharashtra. They said: ‘There are no minorities in India where all people are “culturally, nationally and DNA-wise Hindus’ (The Indian Express, 13 March. 2015). In short, it is plausible to say that on minority question, present RSS leaders are further endorsing similar views as earlier said by Hinduvta ideologues.
In short, RSS and BJP combine have always tried to argue that Minoritim’ and Politics of appeasement pose danger to country and must be stopped. However, we argue that the claims of minority rights became justified when communal majoritarian forces captures state power. In this regards, it would be appropriate see what Ambedkar had said during making of India’s secular constitution.
‘Ambedkar had argued that the problem lay in the fact that the majority in India was communal, and not a political majority. Even in lay the problem of national liberalism and it was won that minorities were actually aware of it presented itself as a positions that was universal and secular when it was a fact particular and communal’ (S. Tejani, Indian Secularism, A social and Intellectual History (1890-1950), Permanent Black, 2007, Delhi., p. 260).
To stress the point further and expose the hypocrisy of RSS, it is interesting to bring here, again Ambedkar’s views on minority rights and majority communalism. Ambedkar said;
‘Any claim for the sharing of power by the minority is called communalism while the monopolising of the whole power by the majority is called nationalism’? (Irfan Ahmad, Al Jazeera: Are India’s Muslim a minority?
Keeping these arguments in mind, we would like to discuss the views of Hamid Ansari on Indian Muslims, Muslims backwardness and Islam. In our view, Ansari’s speech needs to be holistically understood and interpreted with some academic sensitivity.
Hamid Ansari and Indian Muslims:
It is unfortunate that VHP and BJP both have not spared an iota of time to analyse Ansari’s massage on uniqueness of Indian Islam, secularism and democratic culture of our country. In our view, whatever he has said on socio-economic conditions of Indian Muslims, is widely known and rightly mentioned in Sachar Committee Report ( SCR: 2006). It is well known fact that committee has successfully highlighted that Muslims in India have reached on margins of mainstream development. The committee also points out that Indian Muslims are victim of communal incidents in the public sphere. To elucidate further, let us see how Committee have outlined the manner in which Indian Muslims confronts problems in everyday life. As committee rightly mentioned that: Muslims carry double burden being levelled as ‘anti-national’ and being appeased at the same time (SCR: 2006:11).
Further, the Committee has also mentioned that how Muslims identity are constructed in the Public sphere. On the stereotyping of identity, committee observed that Makers of Muslims identity- the burqua, the purdah, the beard and topi- while adding to the distinctiveness of Indian Muslims have been cause of concern for them in public realm ( Ibid:12).
While highlighting the discrimination particularly amongst the youth, further committee observed that the feeling of being victim of the discrimination attitudes is high amongst Muslims particularly amongst the youth (Ibid: 15).
Having discussed the identity and discrimination issues, as noted by SCR; now let us turn to what Ansari said on Indian Muslims and Islamic traditions. Ansari stressed that Muslims must also introspect within themselves and develop a critical thinking towards their own Islamic traditions. During his speech, the important points he has made on Islam and its traditions, while citing the writings of two Islamic intellectuals such as an Algerian French Philosopher Mohammed Arkoun, and Imam Al-Ghazali’s. Through the writings of Islamic scholars, Ansari try to say that the Indian Muslims must be critical towards their own inherited Islamic tradition and culture, without impinging on the fundamental of faith.
Moreover, Ansari has also tried to give the massage that Muslims must discard the “fundamentalism” and any kind of “orthodoxy”, imposed by some vested interest groups. To overcome the orthodoxy in Islam, Muslims must develop the critical thinking and open the space for the concept of like Ijtihad (independent reasoning). To put in words of Ansari: “The instrumentality of adaptation to change Ijtihad is frowned upon or glossed over. Forgotten is its purpose, defined by the late Sheikh Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi as ‘the ability to cope with the ever changing pattern of life’s requirements’. Equally relevant is Imam Al Ghazali’s delineation of the ambit of Maslaha protection of religion, life, intellect, lineage and property. Bothe provides ample theoretical space for focused thinking on social change without impinging on the fundamental of faith (The Miilli Gazette, 16-30.Sep.2015.p.11).
Furthermore, Ansari has stressed the need for critical thinking towards the tradition. In this regards, he said: “Tradition is made sacrosanct but the rationale of tradition is all but forgotten.” As a result, Jadeediyat or modernity has become “a tainted expression.” He claims that critical thinking is needed both for “the affirmation of faith” and “the well-being of the community ( Ibid. 16-30.Sep.2015.p.11).
Ansari have also pointed out that Muslim community is not a homogeneous in nature but in fact community are also divided on the lines of caste and sects etc. Therefore, one could argue that, it is high time for Muslim community to accept that there is no need to essentialise the identity of Indian Muslims. In the words of Ansari: “We have to admit that both ‘ firqa bandi, and ‘zaat’ identity is a ground reality.”
With regards to Muslims social and economic backwardness, Ansari seems to also accept that the whole community is not considered as backward. Ansari observes: Corrective strategy have to be sought on the category- differentiated admissible in Indian state practice and hitherto denied to Muslims (scheduled caste status) or inadequately admitted ( segments of OBC status). Available data makes it clear that a high percentage of Muslims falls into these two broad categories( Ibid. 16-30.Sep.2015.p.11).
In short, after going through his speech, one could argue that his speech is not contrary to the Constitutional values, secular and plural traditions of Indian’s history and culture. But his speech has really given constitutionally valid perspective to overcome the exiting problems of Indian Muslims.
Concluding remarks
In our view, Ansari speech has clearly outlined the socio-economic status of Indian Muslims along with internal contradiction within community, which needs to be taken seriously by community and society at large. In other words, what Ansari had said about the plight of Indian Muslims is already documented by Sachar committee report. And one could rightly argue that his points are not contrary to values, which is enshrined in India’s secular Constitution. The attacks on Ansari by RSS, VHP and BJP hence appear as politically and communally motivated rather than based on evidence and facts.
In the light of above discussions, one could argue that the project of Hinduvta politics is to artificially construct a so-called majoritarian ‘political community’, by pitching against the minority community as ‘other’. To put differently, RSS and BJP will always try to pose minority community as ‘potential enemy’ to create the larger ‘Hindu Unity’. However, concept of greater ‘Hindu Unity’ is colonial construct as Professor Romila Thapar, a noted Historian, has rightly pointed out. For Thapar and others, Hindu Right wing arguments, for constructing larger ‘Hindu Unity’ is myth and based on arguments of orientalist and colonial state policy of ‘divide and rule’.
……..
(Badre Alam is Ph.D, Research Scholar at Political Science Department, University of Delhi. Sanjay Kumar is Ph.D Research Scholar at Academy International Studies, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi.)