| BEYOND CONTROVERSY:
CHRISTIAN MISSION AND COMMUNAL RELIGIOUS VIOLENCE IN CONTEMPORARY
INDIA |
by Dr David Emmanuel Singh, Oxford, UK |
| Introduction |
| This paper locates the recent Hindu-Muslim
violence in a small Gujrati town called Godhra in North West India
in theories seeking to understand violence and, in particular, religion
and violence. Taking the recent violent conflicts between the Hindus
and Muslims and their aftermath in Gujrat as its case, it presents
an analysis of these events before outlining two quintessential examples
of the response in such a situation. This paper suggests that the
phenomenon of violence associated with religions has more than one
centre and involves cultures other than Christians and Muslims and
the categories of 'Islam and the West'. |
| Descrirtion of Godhra Masacre
and the Aftermath |
| Background |
| Arguably, Christianity, a tiny minority in
India today, arrived on the shores of the subcontinent in the 1st
century CE and subsequently through a series of Syrian migrations,
hundreds of years before the beginning of colonisations and missionary
movements. The theory of the Aryan invasion of India has been and
continues to be a far more controversial a subject.[1]The histories
of the Sindh (in modern Pakistan) describe the invasion and conquest
of the North-West frontiers (beginning in the 8th Century CE) by
Muhammad b. Qasim as an event that liberated the lower castes from
the Aryan or Brahminic tyranny.[2]Some historians and social scientists
endorse this view, whereas, others argue that Brahminism (caste system
legitimized religiously by Aryans) was relatively a flexible system,
and that Brahmins did not enjoy absolute social and political hegemony. |
| Indian historians style Muhammad b. Qasim as
a raider who was systematically resisted by the present North-Western
Indian states of Gujrat and Rajasthan. Some 13th CE works suggest
that the early Muslim invasions of the Indian subcontinent did not
constitute a great social revolution. Their objective was to plunder
the wealth and the desecration of the Hindu holy sites in the name
of God, Islam, the Holy Prophet and the Caliph. In many instances,
the conversions of temples to mosques were understood by these as
symbols of military and religious success. Mass conversions of the
Buddhists and the low caste Hindus did take place, but more in line
with the principle, 'the common people follow the religion of the
powerful.'[4]The majority however, remained affiliated to a great
variety of visions clubbed together as Hinduism. |
| During the Moghul Empire beginning in the 16th
century, Muslims from Central Asia dominated much of northern India.
Akbar, one of the greatest Moghul emperors, encouraged Hindus and
Muslims to live together in harmony. To the ruling elite, the converted
masses often represented an embarrassment for their 'un-Islamic'
or synthetic beliefs and practices. The madrasas (Islamic Schools)
were established, partly to equip the civil service for its role
in the administration of Empire and partly as instruments of Islamization.
The more secular of the Islamic rulers like Akbar attempted to keep
these schools amenable to the pluralistic context of the Empire.
The clergy who ran these schools played a major part in enforcing
conservatism during the reigns of Shah Jahan and Aurangzeb. |
| Historians suggest that after the decline of
the Moghul Empire, the tensions between the Hindus and Muslims were
fueled by the 'divide and rule' tactics of the British. The Muslim
League was formed in the early 1900's to ensure representation by
Muslims in the government alongside the Hindus. In 1940, the leader
of the Muslim League, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, first proposed the idea
of two separate countries- one Hindu and one Muslim. Several organizations
led by the Hindu elite wished India to remain united with a strong
Hindu presence. These made a common cause with some Muslim bodies
in opposing the partition of India.[6]India was carved out as a secular
state guaranteeing religious freedom to the majority Hindus (80%)
and the minorities such as the Muslims (12%), Christians (2%), and
Sikhs (2%) and the Buddhists. The Hindu organizations saw in Gandhi
a traitor and, hence, his murder. Although Gandhi preached religious
tolerance, ½ a million people were displaced and thousands
of Hindus and Muslims crossing into their newly constructed political
boundaries were massacred by zealots on both sides. |
| The extremist Hindu writings suggest that Islam
represents a group of foreign raiders and rulers, who plundered them
systematically, converted their peoples to Islam and their sacred
spaces (temples) to mosques.[7]To the Muslim mind, the loss of power
over the Hindu India represents an aberration to be circumvented
through a radical spiritual re-orientation. Islam is a minority faith
in India and is perceived by Hindus as actively engaging a pan-Islamic
ideology in order to recover the past - something that contributes
to the heightening of the Hindu sense of insecurity. |
| The immediate source of the current Hindu-Muslim
violence in the western Indian state of Gujrat is a dispute over
a holy site in Ayodhya.[8]In 1992, extremist Hindus encouraged by
the cultural organizations such as the Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh
(RSS) and the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VSP) and their political division,
the Bhratiya Janata Party (BJP),[9]tore down the 16th century babri
masjid ( Babri Mosque). This mosque, it is claimed, was built by
a Mughal conqueror on an original temple commemorating the birth
of lord Rama (a virtuous god from the popular Hindu Epic, Ramayana).
During the riots which followed throughout India, over 1100 Muslims
were murdered and countless injured or mutilated. |
| The violence relating to the controversy over
the mosque site in Ayodhya resurfaced in Gujrat, West India. On February
27, 2002, a train carrying the VHP activists returning from Ayodhya
was set on fire by some Muslims at a station called Godhra, killing
58 people. In retaliation, extremist Hindus murdered over 600 Muslims
in the state capital, Ahmedabad. Using this communal conflict as
an election issue, the BJP won a decisive victory unprecedented in
Indian History.[10]Barring a Catholic Church order, a vast majority
of Christians living under these times largely remained aloof. |
| Godhra and its Aftermath |
| Godhra houses a large number of Hindu refugees
from the Partition of India. Out of its 150,000 residents, half are
Muslim. The town has had a history of Hindu-Muslim conflicts.[12]In
December 2001, for the first time, the town saw a clash between a
group of moderate Muslims and the purists (the Tablighi Jama'at)
over the issue of the control of the mosques. The Mosques provide
a site where the Jama'at runs a program of Islamization for ordinary
Muslims. The Mosques also provide funds for the madrasas (seminaries)
throughout Gujarat. The emergence of this version is widely perceived
by the VHP/RSS as a threat to Hinduism. |
| The Jama'at is one of the largest Islamic movements
of the contemporary times in terms of its size and geographical distribution.
It was started by Mawlana Ilyas near Delhi in 1920s upon his graduation
from the madrasa at Deoband. Scholars writing on the Jama'at speak
of it as a quietist movement of ordinary Muslims. Y S Sikand's principal
work on the Jama'at links it to the madrasa at Deoband.[14]Several
recent reports suggest that Deoband is mainly responsible for extremism
in the Jama'at.[15]The well known uprising against the British in
1857, called the 'sepoy mutiny' or the 'first war of independence',
failed to achieve the objective of freeing India. A group of Muslim
religious doctors got together, in the wake of this failed uprising,
to establish the dar al-ulum (seminary) at Deoband in North India.
The principal objective of this madrasa was to Islamize Indian Muslims.
The madrasa opposed both the Muslim League's proposal for the creation
of Pakistan and the uncritical 'anglophilia' of the modernist Aglo-Muhammadan
College (later Aligarh Muslim University). The involvement of the
Jama'at and Deoband in the Godhra arson is bringing to light some
of the changes occurring among both the common and elite Muslims
of Gujarat. |
| Some reports suggest that the Muslim attack
on the Hindu activists was spontaneous. According to a report, the
VHP activists in coaches S-5 and S-6 allegedly refused to pay for
the services offered at the tea stall on Godhra railway station.
This quarrel rapidly turned into a communal incident when the VHP
activists began shouting slogans and vilifying Islam. A young Muslim
woman was allegedly dragged on the train and the combination of all
these events led to the pulling of emergency chains on the train.
By this time an angry mob of Muslims had gathered, which then executed
the arson. |
| Some other reports suggest that the Muslim
attack on the Hindu activists was provoked. The railway records show
that the Sabarmati Express pulled into Godhra at 7-43 a.m., 4.30
hours later than the scheduled arrival time. It left the station
at 7-45 a.m. As the train was gradually gaining momentum, the emergency
chain was pulled three times, first from S-10 and, then, twice from
an unreserved compartment. The time lapse would have been barely
2-3 minutes, which would not have been enough to assemble a 1500
strong mob from the nearby colony of Muslims armed with enough petrol
to set coach S-6 on fire. After the event of the coach arson several
key accused were found to be at large. A local Tablighi Jama'at activist
and religious doctor, trained at the madrasa in Deoband, Mawlana
Hussein Umarji, reportedly distributed stipends of RS 1500 per month
to each family of the accused. For this reason, it is suggested,
the entire episode was premeditated and likely linked to a wider
extremist network involving the Jama'at and the Deoband madrasa. |
| Out of the 1500 people accused, about 100 have
been arrested, some of whom said to be key local leaders. The arrest
of Mawlana Hussein Umarji - an alumnus of Deoband and a Tabligh activist
on 6th February 2003 - is said to be significant. He has been charged
with being part of an organized conspiracy to murder the VHP activists
on the 27th February 2002. |
Using the havala (money laundering) routes,
the Jama'at and Deoband are said to be the major sources of funding
for the building of mosques and madrasas where extremism breeds.
The testimonies of those arrested tell us a chilling story. A guest
house near the railway station, ironically called aman (peace), was
virtually the base of the operation. The night previous to the actual
operation, six key leaders held a series of meetings here. Seven
20-liter petrol cans were bought from a nearby station and stored
at this guesthouse. Two of these leaders visited Mawlana Hussein
Umarji at night and, upon his direction, informed the others to target
coach S-6. Mawlana's links with the Jama'at and Deoband were said
to be the sources of his information on the location of the VHP activists
on the train. Prior to this, these leaders had already prepared a
mob of 1500 men near where they intended to stop the train. The 140
liters of petrol was transported by cyclerickshaws to the station
and loaded onto S-6 through the vestibule, poured into the compartment,
which was then set on fire. |
This was followed by the retaliatory killing
and mutilation of over 600 Muslims by the VHP/RSS activists in Ahmadabad
and some rural regions of Gujarat.[17]In most sites of rioting and
murder, Police either connived with the murderers or played the role
of a passive observer.[18]Large mobs, some of which 10,000 strong
roamed the city dragging Muslims families with children from homes,
pouring petrol over them and burning them alive. The response of
the BJP government at the center was dismal. Some 900 troops arrived
in Ahmedabad, a city of 5 million, 15 % of whom are Muslim, after
much of the killings and destruction of Muslims property had already
taken place. No one stopped a group of Hindus in Ahmedabad who stood
jubilantly around the ruins of a small brick mosque and placed a
tiny shrine to Hanuman, a minor god from the legends of lord Rama
in the Ramayana.
The Press placed a large degree of attention not on the rioting and
killings but, on how BJP cashed in on the Godhra and its aftermath
to come to power in Gujarat. The strategy adopted by the BJP presented
all Muslims as terrorists. Gujarat was said to be potentially under
Muslim siege. Muslims were presented as essentially hostile to Hindus
and Hinduism and disloyal to India. The Godhra incidence was used
as a mantra for winning a decisive election[19] BJP headquarters
are now debating on how this strategy can be recycled in other states
of India such as the Himanchal Pradesh (Himalayan state in North
India) and the traditional Congress strongholds of Rajasthan (Western
India) and Madhya Pradesh (Central India). |
| THEORETICAL DISCUSSION OF VIOLENCE |
Violence has been defined fundamentally as
a 'physical force' that inflicts or has the potential to harm or
injure persons or their property. Mary Jackson expounds this definition
further when she makes a distinction between 'actions' and 'injuries'.
She speaks of actions including 'corporal', 'written' or 'verbal'
factors and injuries including 'physical', 'psychological' or 'material'
aspects.[21]Others have made the point that physical injury is one
of the manifestations of violence.[22]Forms of actions such as a
piece of writing, words or symbolic acts of destroying or desecrating
sacred spaces such as temples, churches, mosques, and sacred icons
or images seem violent to believers.
Christians and Muslims in India (as perhaps also elsewhere) are well-known
for their polemics against each other. Religious extremists in India
are carrying the verbal and written polemics to another extreme of
actually physically harming each other and desecrating or destroying
each others sacred spaces. The Taliban's destruction of the 800 year
old Buddha statue was, in this sense, perceived by the Buddhists
as an act of violence.
Extremist religious violence of these types, experienced at many
different locations globally, has contributed to a surge in works
on violence and religion. D G Brombley and J G Melton's edited volume,
for instance, published in 2002 by Cambridge University Press shows
that there is a renewed interest among scholars trying to understand
violence that is religious and collective in nature.[23] B P Stone's
work on religion and violence in films shows how films are increasingly
depicting religion as a force for justifying and legitimating violence.
Moderate elements within the world's historical religions do not
lag behind. World Council of Churches organized a conference in Florida,
U.S.A. February 8-12, 2002 where members from five different religious
groups Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, and Judaism expressed
concern over the growing violence around the world. They outlined
the various types or faces of violence and expressed the need for
being self-critical.
After 9/11, Charles K. Bellinger produced a website for teaching
and learning in theology and religion.This site offers course modules,
electronic texts, electronic journals, bibliographies and Discussion
groups on the issue of religion and violence. Rene Girard who published
his influential work on this issue in the early 70s features prominently
in these resources. Queens University, Canada offers a course titled
'Religion and Violence' under Religious Studies department which
shows links between violence and religious beliefs, practices and
institutions. This course fundamentally attempts to analyze violence
and religious beliefs, practices and institutions relying heavily
on Rene Girard's theory of violence.
Several recent works represent different methodological disciplines
and, thus, bring to light newer theories. These theories deal with
two basic dimensions of violence: specifically religious violence
and violence which may have a religious dimension, but can be better
explained in other terms. These theories fall in the larger field
of peace and conflict studies. |
The theories of violence being intrinsic to
religion come to us from the 60s and the early 70s through the works
of Rene Girard, Walter Burkert, Jonathan Smith and George Bataille.These
scholars built on the phenomenological and psychoanalytical works
on the idea of 'sacrifice' in religion. Girard's theory, in particular,
when it is viewed in relation to inter-cultural conflicts, has been
appealed to in recent studies of nationalistic struggles, ethno-religious
violence and religious terrorism.
Rene Girard's theory puts forward that violence is imitative. It
engages 'all against all' and issues from the desire for common objects.Human
society begins when violence, thus set off, transforms into the collective
sacrifice of a scapegoat. Violence becomes focused on a specific
victim who possesses some distinctive weakness. Thus, the cycle of
violence is broken and society experiences unity. This effect produces
in society a desire to reproduce the experience of the absence of
violence through the ritual reenactments of the original murder.
Girard lists four features that characterize the scapegoat mechanism
either in mythic textual/rituals or in actual historical persecutions
by one group of another: the presence of a crisis; crimes that challenge
certain essential differences; characteristics that mark the victim
(s) as unusual or weak; and the act of violence itself. He had a
clear bias toward Christianity. He believed that the NT story of
Jesus undermines the religious basis for persecution and scapegoat.
The Bible tells the story of violence from the victim's point of
view. His point about the victim's perspective undermining the basis
of violence may have parallels in the Minority-Majority, the Dominant-Weak
and the Dalit-Upper Caste struggles and the various other liberation
theologies. His theory promises interesting insights into the example
of the Hindu-Muslim conflict I referred to above.
Among the many others, Girard's theory informs the works of S P Huntington,David
Little and Mark Jurgensmeyer who think of the West and Islam as two
antithetical civilizations in an irreconcilable conflict with each
other. Secularization is perceived by some to be on the ebb and religion
is believed to be increasingly dominating societies and transcending
national boundaries. These scholars speak of two intrinsically opposing
civilizations - West and Islamic. In this context, Huntington calls
for the Western preparedness for facing this threat and Jurgensmeyer
calls for a greater degree of understanding and restraint. Recently,
D Senghass has challenged essentialist assumptions of cultural analyses.
He argues that the main fault-lines are socio-economic and not geo-political.
More importantly, according to him, these fault-lines act as divisive
forces both intra and inter-culturally.
Despite its currency, the single theory of Girard cannot give us
a complete view of religious violence. This is because some forms
of violence may have a religious dimension, but they may also be
explained in economic, political or other 'non-religious' terms.Thus,
for instance, political authorities or the state apparatus may be
a source of violence. In some cases these authorities may cloak themselves
in religion to legitimise the extremes of the abuse of power for
an ideology. [38]Correspondingly, the minority struggles against
these repressive regimes may be framed in religious terms.
Religious violence may also be understood in terms of economic development
or lack of development on account of globalisation. Globalisation
is seen in many countries as a bane for local economies and indigenous
cultures. M Hardt and A Negri suggest that there might be a link
between conflicts and Globalisation.Their theory is an opposite of
Huntington's cultural analysis. In contrast to Huntington, they suggest
that a new Empire (with the West leading the way) is not ebbing (as
Huntington posited), but is already creating a new universal order
of globalization that accepts no borders. This is, according to them,
causing the economic and cultural changes across the globe. This
Empire challenges the concepts of sovereignty, nation, religion,
and people globally. It claims to be 'a new Communist Manifesto '
and 'the basis for a truly democratic global society'. The dominant
ideological version of Islam, unlike the all-embracing Hinduism,
sees itself in an antithetical position in relation to this Empire
whose epicenter is understood to be the US or the West and, hence,
the conflict. |
| UNDERSTANDING MUSLIMS-HINDU VIOLENCE
IN INDIA |
I pointed out above that according to Senghass,
fault-lines act both intra and inter-culturally. Thus, one cannot
strictly speak in essentialist terms of conflict being between two
or more objectified cultures. The reality is that religious violence
manifests itself with different intensities at diverse locations
on the globe. Even when conflicts spill out of national boundaries
and seem to involve particular cultures, not all sub-groups within
these cultures participate in violence. Violence afflicts cultures
from within and without, even those that are not necessarily global
in their vision, such as Hinduism. It is served by a complex mechanism
involving both elements essential to religions and those that are
extraneous to them. How do we, in this context, understand Hindu-Muslim
violence?
Firstly, it is important to note that Hinduism or Indian Islam as
a whole is not participating in violent conflicts. The extremist
bases within Hinduism and Indian Islam are becoming more visible,
but there is still a need to accurately establish that violent conflicts
spawned by these are being participated in, actively or tacitly,
by a widening number of coreligionists. The evidence from the case
study from Godhra suggests that the Tablighi Jama'at, a group of
ordinary Muslims, is gradually emerging from its pacifist goal of
proselytising and is participating in the wider 'Ulama' inspired
extremism. The evidence also suggests that there is internal resistance
from a vast numbers of Muslims who practice a more synthetic form
of Islam. This Islam does not consider Hinduism as an object of annihilation.
It integrates practices and beliefs which meet their needs and does
not necessarily see them as 'un-Islamic'. It recognises continuity
between Islam and Hinduism and leaves doors open for the mutual crossing
over to take place.
Hinduism has been known, up until recent times, as a broad network
of religious visions or an umbrella holding a wide variety of rituals
and beliefs. In speaking of Hinduism, Gandhi used the flowerbed imagery.
He thought of Hinduism being a flowerbed containing different types
of flowers (religions and ideologies). The case of Buddhism is often
cited as an evidence of Hinduism's tolerance towards dissent and
it's all absorbing capacity. The principal reason for the decline
of Buddhism in India until B R Ambedkar came into the picture was
precisely this trait of Hinduism. [42]
Hindu extremism has been on the Indian soil for well over a century.
What is unprecedented is the speed with which it has expanded its
cultural and political power through the RSS, the VHP and the BJP.
These organizations are generally known to be led and inspired by
the elite Hindus, the Brahmins and the Khshatriyas (the two chief
castes of the priests and the warriors respectively).The resurgence
of the Dalit interest in Buddhism, Islam and Christianity (in this
order of priority) is taking place during a period when Brahminism
is seeking to overshadow the plurality existing within Hinduism.[43]Buddhism
is increasing perceiving itself as a prophetic force that succeeded
in undermining Brahmanism before the Common Era and sees itself as
facilitating the same process now. [44]To a large number of the Dalits
who consider conversion, besides being considered foreign, Christianity
and Islam do not seem equally revolutionary.
Hinduism is being increasingly identified by minorities with Brahminism
and is perceived as an instrument of oppression, domination and 'Aryanization'.[45]The
term Aryanization is used to denote the forced cultural assimilation
of plurality within the vision of the powerful and dominant Aryas,
namely the Brahmins.[46]This process gained momentum around the symbolic
destruction of the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya. The term 'Semiticisation'
is also used often in conjunction with Aryanization.[47] The high
caste Hindus ask the question: Why were the Christians and Muslims
able to establish Empires? In answer to this question they suggest
that this is because they had a belief in One God, One Book, One
Church/Umma, and One Founder/Prophet. This analysis leads them to
the conclusion that if Hinduism (as defined by them) were to become
the sole religion of the land of India, Hindus (the High Castes)
would have to redefine Hinduism in the 'Semitic' terms. Thus, Rama
is chosen from among millions of personal deities, god-men and god-women
as the God and Prophet/Founder of Hinduism and Ramayana is chosen
from among a plurality of scriptures as the Bible/Qur'an of Hinduism.
Secondly, one can recognize the important insight Girard's analysis
gives on the issue of Hindu-Muslim conflicts. [48]Girard lists four
features that characterize the scapegoat mechanism in mythic texts/rituals
or in actual historical persecutions by one group of another: the
presence of a crisis; crimes that challenge certain essential differences;
characteristics that mark the victim (s) as unusual or weak; and
the act of violence itself.
In the presence of a perceived crisis, the dominant castes see themselves
as the representatives of Hinduism. This may explain why the Brahmin/Khshatriya
led RSS, VHP and BJP see themselves as representing all Hindus. The
crisis is understood largely in terms of Islam, although Christians
often get caught in the crossfire. The general perception of Muslims
is that they are looking outwards to Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Their
true loyalties lie out of India to an idealistic version of Islam,
which recognizes no political boundaries. Pakistan is a sworn traditional
enemy of India. Muslim loyalty to Pakistan is seen to be expressed
through simple gestures such as celebrating Pakistan's victory in
a Cricket match. The Hindu elite are acutely aware of over 500 year
long history of Muslim raids, desecration and destruction of its
sacred spaces and the domination of India through the Sultanates
and the Mughal Empire. The spread of the Pan-Islamic ideology through
the agency of the ever increasing number of madrasas, mosques and
other Muslim organizations is creating in the Hindu mind a sense
of a looming crisis.[49]This crisis is exacerbated by the fact of
mass migration of the Bangladeshi Muslims into Indian territories.[50]
Anything Muslims (and Christians)[51]do or say that may suggest their
extra-territorial loyalties or their distinctiveness heightens the
Hindu sense of crisis and, consequently, a sense of insecurity. Thus,
the celebration of Pakistan's victory in Cricket, their manner of
dressing and grooming, the architecture of their mosques, madrasas,
offices or homes, and a local riot or a skirmish is immediately seen
in Pan-Islamic terms.
These Hindus do not tire to suggest that Islam is a minority religion
in India; as such it is no threat to the Hindus. In a bid to increase
their power in majority-minority terms, the RSS, VHP and BJP combined
devises an ideological form of Hinduism, which seeks to define the
plurality within Hinduism through the 'Semitic' categories of One
God, One Book and One God/Founder. This sort of imposition raises
the Dalit protests and conversions, but they are tolerated as long
as the conversions remain confined to Buddhism. The reactions either
through re-conversions or passing of bills banning conversions are
often swift when there are conversions to Islam or Christianity.[52]Conversions
of the Dalits to Islam and Christianity are perceived as ways in
which Muslims and Christians are seeking power from within the Indian
soil and, hence, legislations banning it, re-conversion drives or
overt acts of violence at the slightest grounds. The enemy is defined
in a very unspecific and totalitarian manner. For this reason, the
retaliatory violence against the Godhra killings was not felt necessary
in Godhra, but in Ahmedabad.
The Muslim initiative in choosing to attack Hindu activists on Sabarmati
Express is based on the confidence the community is appearing to
gain through the spread of Islamism. Islamism involves a belief about
all Muslims forming a single and undifferentiated umma (pan-Islamic
community), and the Hindus forming a unified group of the enemies
of Islam. The fact is that Muslims, like Christians and Hindus, do
not form a single community; there are different types of fault-lines
within what is holistically referred to as Islam. Islamism assumes
that an essential unity of all Muslims already exists. It seeks to
enable the coreligionists to realize this unity by sensitizing them
to the belief that there is a severe crisis of faith within Islam
and a rising coalition of anti-Islamic forces (Hindus) outside Islam.
This sense of unity accords those who subscribe to Islamism a tremendous
sense of power and, thus, the certainty that the anti-Islamic forces,
however strong they might seem outwardly, cannot stand against it.
Based on these beliefs, Islamism tackles the inward and outward crises
in two ways. Firstly, it deal with the inward crisis through pro-active
campaigns of Islamization of Muslim masses (the kind of work that
Tablighi Jama'at is currently doing worldwide). Islamization seeks
to standardize the foundational Islamic practices, beliefs, and symbols
that it believes, characterize Islam. This identity essentially serves
to over-ride the factual diversity of language, race, tribe, and
ethnicity. It also enables Muslims to transcend the consciousness
of their local and national identities, thereby giving them a sense
of unity with a larger brotherhood. Secondly, Islamism deals with
the outward crisis by calling for a waging of holy wars against the
perceived threats from the enemies of Islam. In those regions, however,
where Islam is numerically or politically less powerful (as in India),
the ideology justifies the bursts of periodic violence as a means
of undermining the enemies. The fear, shock or panic these generate
fuel the ideology and, hence, the need for it to be repetitive.
More research needs to be done to determine the manner and extent
to which this ideology is spreading among common Indian Muslims.
This is a research that I am currently engaged in. The description
of the Godhra violence however, suggests that Islamism is making
its presence felt in India both through the mass movements like the
Tablighi Jama'at, and the religious schools like the Dar al-Ulum
at Deoband. The 'Ulama' trained in these schools serve as the evangelists
of Islamism. The Tablighi Jama'at's networks of common Muslim preachers
throughout the Indian subcontinent, East and West Asia, and the UK,
enhances the effect of the ideology through engaging the common Muslim
masses. This ideology provides a sense of being one in faith and
purpose with brothers elsewhere on the globe and, hence, the motivation
to take on the enemies of Islam, the Hindus. |
| BEYOND CONTROVERSY |
After the demolition of the Mosque at Ayodhya,
the India Today published an issue dedicated to the views and sketches
by individuals drawn from the various walks of life and ages. What
was common to all of these was a sense that something terrible had
happened. The demolition of the Mosque undermined all that post independence
India stood for - it's secular ideals, democracy, it's traditional
tolerance, respect for all religions and life and freedom itself.
These individuals expressed through poetry, prose, sketches and paintings
how they saw 'aman' (harmony) could reign again. That issue of the
India today exists in libraries. The reality is different. Years
after the demolition, society still has not been able to come to
a consensus on how to undo the symbolic and actual damage done then,
and since then, several other times, including the ones at Godhra
and Ahmedabad.
Many churches in India acknowledge that Church's mission ought to
be holistic.[53]Few however, appear to be proactively seeking to
cross the cultural, ethnic and theological disjunction between and
within religions with a view to catalysing reconciliation. Yet, Indian
Christians are generally recognised for their pacifist attitude.
According to a well known journalist, Vir Sanghvi, nothing has affected
Indians as deeply as the burning alive of the Australian Christian,
Graham Stains, and his two sons in India. [54]The impact of the murder
of these was enhanced by the public statements of Gladys Stains (wife
of Graham) and Esther (daughter) who saw the deaths of their beloved
as 'a sacrifice for the Nation of India' and this painful experience
eliciting not curse, but a peaceful and forgiving attitude. [55]
Christian pacifism aside, a vast number of Christian institutions
and Churches are widely perceived as having inherited from foreign
missions vast areas of property, educational institutions, hospitals,
and imposing Church buildings in prime locations throughout India.
The average Christian is poor, but, Churches and the Christian institutions
appear to be prosperous and powerful beyond their means. The extent
of their dependence on the West is known to the government and the
Hindu cultural organizations. Whilst the inflow of funds is regulated,
the use of these funds is not. Christian dependence on the West and
the gap in the knowledge of the precise manner in which the funds
are used contribute to the depiction of Christians as those whose
loyalties rest with the 'Christian West' whose agenda they appear
to be furthering. This characterization is not entirely askew. What
appears more consistent with the Christian ethos is sacrifice, examples
of which are, at least at the present time, rather rare.
Churches and Christian organizations did indeed engage in providing
relief to victims in Gujrat, but it was largely reactive. Christians
did not have any significant part in actually doing something for
the people as they were being murdered. The missionary role models
of Indian Christians have largely been argumentative and controversial.
This approach to Christian work was in line with the enlightenment
apologetics of the missionary movement of the 19th century. Some
missionaries like the Henry Martyn however, were slightly ahead of
their time in recognizing that controversy was not the best way to
'reach out to the soul' and, hence, nurtured the desire to 'burn
out' and 'forsake everything' for God and people they served. Dr
Michael Nazir-Ali, in a recent lecture, characterizes Henry Martyn
as a Martyr for willingly enduring hardships as he sought to bridge
cultural and linguistic divides beyond the cosy comforts of the company
territories.[56]This is different from the pathological elements
in the martyrdom sought by those who die killing the 'enemies of
God' or invite death foolishly by choosing to abuse the cultural,
ethnic and religious wealth of the people of other faiths.
Among possibly several others, two examples of sacrifice without
any other ulterior motive than to further reconciliation and peace
come from the Henry Martyn Institute (HMI) in Hyderabad, India and
St. Mary's Dominican Hospital in Ahmedabad, India will suffice.
Post-6 December 1992 saw a string of violent clashes between extremist
Muslims and Hindus in several towns of North India and Hyderabad
in South India. Often the victims were innocent men, women and children
lacking protection in contexts where police neutrality is a rare
commodity. The HMI, true to its commitments to reconciliation, put
together a peace corps called the 'aman-shanti forum'. [57]The forum
obtained special permits and roamed the old city, the epicentre of
violence, and assisted and rescued those wounded and affected by
the riots whilst it was actually sweeping through the heart of the
city. Since then the HMI has not only expanded its proactive peace
effort through actually establishing itself in centres (wedged between
Hindu and Muslim communities) associated with violence in the old
city, but has also incorporated conflict resolution as a proactive
in-house and external training programs.
Another example comes from the Spanish Dominicans who run St. Mary's
Hospital in Ahmedabad.[58]Sister Lucia Carabias and her colleagues
gave refuge to over 6,000 Muslims fleeing angry Hindu mobs in the
city. The St. Mary's compound which includes a hospital and a Mahila
Shikshan Kendra (training center for women learning handcrafts) is
surrounded by Muslim homes. After pleading with the local police
for several days to provide security for the frightened Muslims seeking
refuge in their compound, the nuns finally convinced the police to
come and patrol the gates, protecting the Muslims inside from mobs
of angry Hindus. People responded to this act of courage, mercy and
sacrifice by sending money to St. Mary's to help feed the refugees.
Several other sent money to help rebuild the homes of Muslims, which
were totally razed to the ground by the mobs. |
| CONCLUSION |
This paper analysed the recent Hindu-Muslim
violence in Gujrat within the framework of theories of violence and
religion falling in the rubric of Conflict and Peace Studies. It
gave two examples of institutions which too the risk of being present
and doing something positive during the two related episodes of violence.
As part of the wider significance, this paper suggests that violence
associated with religions is a complex phenomenon. Its understanding
requires a multi-disciplinary approach because it is wider than the
categories of 'Islam and the West' and manifests at more than one
centre, both intra and inter-culturally. |
|
|
