(Secular Perspective Feb. 16-28, 2007)
I often confront a question in my workshops
and lectures as to why Muslims do not want to
become part of mainstream. In a way it is quite
a hackneyed question but nevertheless it persists
in the minds of many people, even among those
who are quite secular. Before we discuss whether
minorities, especially Muslims, are part of
mainstream or not, we should have clear idea
of what is mainstream.
To understand what is mainstream, important
question is who defines mainstream? As the saying
goes culture of the ruling class is the ruling
culture, mainstream is also what the ruling
or upper classes to be the mainstream. In democracy
there should not be any question of ruling class
but our democracy is hardly participatory, much
less an ideal democracy. The idea of ruling
class is very much the ruling idea in our democracy.
Thus what constitutes mainstream is mainly defined
by the ruling classes, which ultimately means
the upper caste and upper class people. For
them mainstream is mainly constituted by those
who follow classical culture of upper caste
Hindus, are highly educated and enjoy certain
reasonable standard of life. To be part of mainstream
it is very necessary to be part of Vedic culture.
By this definition even dalits and tribals are
hardly part of mainstream. They are also poor,
uneducated and speak dialect, rather than Sanskritised
Hindi or any other classical language. But only
difference is that they are
natives of India and do not follow a[N]y 'foreign
religion'. Also, they belong to 'other' castes
but not to 'other' religion. Moreover, their
otherisation will result in fragmentation of
Hindu solidarity and thus their otherisation
can be politically loosing proposition.
Thus though dalits and tribals are not part
of national mainstream, silence about them is
better part of political strategy. But otherisation
of Muslims has been going on ever since the
British rulers adopted the strategy of divide
and rule and the communal forces found it quite
useful after independence and through their
propaganda the myth of Muslims, not being part
of mainstream spread and some secular minded
people also became victim of it. The myth needs
to be examined critically.
First thing to note is that entire community
should not be treated as single homogenised
unit. Indian Muslim community is highly diverse,
as diverse as the Hindu community. There is
regional, cultural, linguistic and religious
(sectarian) diversity besides economic diversity.
How can one maintain that entire Muslim community
is away from Indian mainstream?
Are Muslims of Kerala and Tamil Nadu who are
firmly rooted in native cultures and speak Malayalam
and Tamil respectively, not part of Indian mainstream?
If they are not then even Malayalam and Tamil
Hindus too, are not part of mainstream. Muslims,
Christians and Hindus of these regions wear
similar clothes, eat similar food, enjoy same
music and follow same regional customs and traditions.
More or less same applies to Andhra and Karnataka
Muslims (with the exception of Hyderabad and
few other towns).
What about Kashmiri Muslims and Pandits? Do
they not speak same language and follow similar
traditions? Kashmiri Muslims and Pandits are
quite integrated. How can one maintain that
Kashmiri Muslims are not part of mainstream
whereas Hindus are? It will be quite untenable
position. Then what about Kargil Muslims and
Gujjar and Bakarwal tribes of Kashmir Valley?
These Gujjar and Bakarwal Muslims have their
own identity separate from Kashmiri Muslims
and are firmly rooted in their tribal culture.
Then what about Muslims in rural areas of north
India i.e. in U.P. and Bihar? They speak same
dialect as rural Hindus, follow same customs
and traditions and even wear same dress as Hindus
of the region do. They speak Braj, Bhojpuri,
Maithili, Rajasthani, Malvi and similar other
dialects. Many of them go to mosques for prayers
wearing dhoti and turban which is considered
a ?Hindu dress?.
Also, what about Bohras, Khojas and Memons?
They are so well rooted in Gujarat culture and
they speak Gujarati or Kutcchi wherever they
go in the world? Their entire culture is rooted
in Gujarat or different regions of Gujarat.
Will they also be considered as not being part
of mainstream?
Then what about Parsis, Paswans, Weavers, Silawats
(brick layers), Rangrez (dyers), Bangle-makers,
Malis (vegetable and fruit sellers from Mahrashtra),
Raeens (vegetable sellers from Bihar) and so
on. Are they not Indians and part of Indian
mainstream or just because they are low caste
illiterate and uncultured, they cannot be part
of Indian mainstream? Are then their counterpart
Hindu low caste dalits and backwards not part
of Indian mainstream? If they are, how can their
Hindu counterpart then be part of mainstream?
No one maintains that dalits are not part of
Indian mainstream.
Is then main problem their religion? Is Islam
then part of the problem? Even if it is so these
low caste dalit and backward caste Muslims hardly
live 'Islamised' life style. As pointed out
above they are quite indistinct from their Hindu
counterparts in every way and many of them,
like Meo Muslims, follow all 'Hindu' customs
and traditions. The Tablighi movement was started
in mid-twentieth century to 'Islamise' the Meos
but until today Meos could not be 'Islamised'
as Tablighi movement desired and they still
cling to their own native customs and traditions.
Then there are Nuts of Rajasthan and also Saperas
(the snake catchers) in Maharashtra. They are
hardly aware of their Islamic identity and their
conversion to Islam has hardly brought any change
in their culture and way of living. Perhaps
nothing changed except their names and in many
cases even names did not change. And let us
not forget that these Muslims constitute the
overwhelming majority of Indian Muslims today.
How these Muslims should then be treated? As
aliens and away from mainstream? How strange
then if they are treated as not part of mainstream?
Now let us discuss the case of urban upper caste
Muslims who insist on their Islamic identity.
The fact is that even these Muslims should be
categorised as Indo-Muslims as far as their
cultural identity is concerned. Also, most of
these Muslims never attend madrasas. They go
to English medium schools or to regional language
schools and in North India lower caste among
them send their children to Hindi medium schools.
Of course there are some Muslims who go to Urdu
medium schools.
Now the Sachar Committee Report has established
that only 4 per cent Muslim children go to madrasas
and that means only a tiny percentage of Muslims
sends their children to madrasas. Sending to
madrasas is also often mentioned as the reason
for being aloof from Indian mainstream. Even
that myth has now been exploded by the data
provided by Sachar Committee report.
It is also said that since Muslims feel strongly
about certain events taking place in Muslim
countries like Palestine or Iraq or Mecca and
hence they are not truly Indian. Now millions
of Hindu Indians are living in U.K., USA and
other western countries and have become citizens
of those countries. Do they feel strongly about
events in India or not? Do they lobby for India
in those respective countries on some important
issues or not? Should they be then accepted
as part of American or British mainstream or
not? How would they feel if natives of those
countries reject them?
Most of the Arab countries are friendly to India
and India until recently has supported the Arab
cause (though now since NDA came to power there
has been clear re-orientation in foreign policy
and almost same orientation continues during
the UPA Government which feels itself closer
to USA position in the Arab world). Of course
there are some Muslims who over-react on these
events and a section of Muslim leadership incites
them to do so to grind their own political axe.
The secular Muslim intellectuals should strive
to change this situation and educate the Muslim
masses in this respect.
It is also not correct that Muslims are over
zealous in religious matters. It is the general
characteristics of Indian society. Any anthropologist
who has done field studies will bear this out.
In fact, and this is very interesting to note,
that one anthropological study in West Bengal
suggests that all life cycle rituals in Bengal
among Hindus as well as Muslims are similar
and life cycle rituals mean rituals from birth
to death. Things are not very different in other
parts of India.
Thus it will be seen that it is sheer myth spread
by communal forces that Muslims are not part
of mainstream and need to be forced into it.
They are as much part of mainstream as any India.
Now as Hindu militancy is intensifying Christians
are also being seen as separate from mainstream
though they are harbingers of modern education
in India and run so many prime educational institutions
in which even most of the communal leaders have
been educated.
Muslims are undoubtedly quite backward as very
well brought out by Sachar Committee report
and blame does not lie with Muslims for their
backwardness except in limited sense. It is
more due to neglect of successive governments
and it is as much responsibility of Government
as that of Muslim leaders to pull them out of
this backwardness.
===============================
Centre for Study of Society and Secularism
Website: <http://www.csss-isla.com/>www.csss-isla.com
