http://www.thehindu.com/
Sustaining the myth of hostility
Mushirul Hasan
To Naipaul, Hindu militancy is a corrective to the past. He therefore
rejects the possibility of Islam reconciling with other religions in
the subcontinent
“There was in India now what didn’t exist 200 years before: a central will, a central intellect, a national idea,” wrote Vidiadhar S. Naipaul in 1990 in India: A Million Mutinies Now, his third book on the land of his forefathers. Sir Vidia’s construction of the Indian nation, his views on certain major episodes in contemporary history, his interpretation of Islam, and the role of minorities in secular India have always been controversial. Last week, they came under attack again, this time from Girish Karnad. Since then, some have rushed to Naipaul’s defence, others to Karnad’s. As a historian, I too would like to join the debate.
To remind readers, Naipaul’s ancestors left India in the early 1880s as indentured labourers for the sugar estates of Guyana and Trinidad. He returned to India with An Area of Darkness, advertised as ‘tender, lyrical, (and) explosive.’ Thereafter, he chronicled the histories of a wounded civilisation and a million mutinies in India.
In between, he aimed salvos at Islam not once but twice, in laboured projects.
‘Indigestibility of Muslims’
Naipaul wholly subscribes to the views of Samuel P. Huntington, a controversial American political scientist who earned his reputation by arguing that the New World Order is based on patterns of conflict and cooperation founded on cultural distinctions and identifications. He talked of “the indigestibility of Muslims” and their propensity towards violent conflict, which makes them threatening.Naipaul too warns readers of Islamic ‘parasitism,’ and endorses the Orientalist belief that Islam as a coherent, transnational, monolithic force has been engaged in a unilinear confrontational relationship with the West. His essentialist reading of history allows him to sustain the myth of an inherent hostility between two antagonistic sides.
I am not qualified to judge Naipaul’s standing in the literary world, but I have no doubt in my mind that he is ignorant of the nuances of Islam and unacquainted with the languages of the people he speaks to. He records and assesses only what he sees and hears from his interpreters. In the most literal sense, he finds the cultures indecipherable, for he cannot transliterate the Arabic alphabet. He had known Muslims all his life in Trinidad, but knew little of Islam. Its doctrine did not interest him; it didn’t seem worth inquiring into; and over the years, in spite of travel, he has added little to the knowledge gathered in his childhood.
He continues to subscribe to the illogical mistrust of Muslims he had been taught as a child: a particular greybeard Muslim, described in An Area of Darkness, has come to embody ‘every sort of threat.’ Much like Nirad Chaudhuri, who was guilty of disregarding common sense to feed his own petty prejudices towards the Muslim communities, Naipaul’s encounters with them “are suffused with a sense of youthful bigotries.”
Among the Believers: An Islamic Journey is permeated with the sentiment that Islam sanctifies rage — rage about faith, political rage, and that Muslim societies are rigid, authoritarian, uncreative, and hostile to the West. In Indonesia, he runs into Imamuddin who confirms him in the stereotype. In Iran, Behzad leaves him convinced that, “now in Islamic countries there would be the Behzads who, in an inversion of Islamic passions, would have a vision of society cleansed and purified, a society of believers.” In Pakistan, he reminds us of the power of religion and the hollowness of secular cults in a fragmented country, economically stagnant, despotically ruled, with its gifted people close to hysteria.
In most of the description, otherwise nicely woven into a coherent story, there is hardly any reference to the debilitating legacy of colonial rule. The civilised, innovative, and technologically advanced West stands out as a vibrant symbol of progress and modernity, whereas the Muslim societies Naipaul encounters, despite their varying experiences and trajectories, are destructive, inert, and resentful of the West. With Naipaul relegating colonialism and imperial subjugation of Muslim societies to the background, the West appears an open, generous and universal civilisation.
In fact, it is the West that is consistently portrayed as exploited by lesser societies resentful of its benign, or at worst natural, creativity: “Indeed,” as scholar Rob Nixon points out, “Naipaul is so decided in his distribution of moral and cultural worth between the cultures of anarchic rage and the ‘universal civilization’ that he ends up demonizing Islam as routinely as the most battle-minded of his Islamic interlocutors demonize the West.”
Beyond Belief: Islamic Excursions among the Converted People (1998), chooses Islamic bad faith as its theme, portraying “the same primitive, rudimentary, unsatisfactory and reductive thesis” that the Muslims having been converted from Hinduism, must experience the ignominy of all converted people. In India: A Million Mutinies (1990), the 1857 revolt is regarded as the last flare-up of Muslim energy until the agitation for a separate Muslim homeland. So far so good. But when Naipaul finds the Lucknow bazaars expressing the faith of the book and the mosque, for example Aminabad, a crowded marketplace, serving the faith, it becomes too much to swallow.
On Babri Masjid
Two years after A Million Mutinies, Naipaul defends the destruction of the Babri Masjid by calling it “an act of historical balancing.” “Ayodhya,” he reportedly told a small gathering at the BJP office in 2004, “was a sort of passion … Any passion has to be encouraged. I always support actions coming out of passion as these reflect creativity.” Whose passion? Of those Muslims who, despite the bitterness since December 1992, still weave the garlands used in the temple and produce everything necessary for dressing the icons preparatory to worship?The fraternity of writers to which Naipaul belongs strongly contests not only his reading of the calamitous effect of Islam, but also his virtual justification of vandalism in the name of Islam. Salman Rushdie and others have written with infinitely greater sympathy and comprehension, and cultivated a distinctly secular point of view which had grown out of a reaction against Partition. Many others write convincingly about Islam as a living and changing reality, what Muslims mean by it is constantly changing because of the particular circumstances of time and place. They study it in its historical reality, without value judgments about what it ought to be.
There is however no place for these sentiments in Naipaul’s jaundiced views. To him, Hindu militancy is a necessary corrective to the past, a creative force. He therefore rejects the possibility of Islam, a religion of fixed laws, working out reconciliation with other religions in the subcontinent. This is, in short, the clash of civilisations theory.
Karnad is right
Girish Karnad is right. Naipaul is as ill-informed about India as Huntington was about the world outside the western hemisphere. One more related point. He talks of a fractured past solely in terms of Muslim invasions and conveniently forgets the grinding down of the Buddhist-Jain culture during the period of Brahmanical revival. He fumes and frets even though a fringe element alone celebrates the vandalism of the early Islamists who were driven more by the desire to establish the might of an evangelical Islam than to deface Hindu places of worship. With anger, remorse, and bitterness becoming a substitute for serious study and analysis, Naipaul’s plan for India’s salvation collapses like a pack of cards.Hence the devastating enunciation of his Beyond Belief by Edward Said: “Somewhere along the way Naipaul, in my opinion, himself suffered a serious intellectual accident. His obsession with Islam caused him somehow to stop thinking, to become instead a kind of mental suicide compelled to repeat the same formula over and over. This is what I’d call an ‘intellectual catastrophe of the first order’.”
In the recent debate over Karnad’s remarks, several analysts have considered Naipaul’s interpretation of Islam as valid. I take issue with them. I believe writers like him widen the existing chasm between the Muslim communities and the followers of other religions. We need writers, poets and publicists who create mutual understanding and interfaith dialogue rather than create distrust and promote intolerance.
Peter Geyl reminded us that the historian should be interested in his subject for its own sake, he should try to get in touch with things as they were, the people and the vicissitudes of their fortunes should mean something to him in themselves. “Let Colour Fill the Flowers, Let Breeze of Early Spring Blow,” wrote the Urdu poet, Faiz Ahmad Faiz.
If ever Naipaul wants to write a travelogue on Muslim countries, the sense of Islam as something more than words in texts, as something living in individual Muslims, must emerge from his pen.
(Mushirul Hasan is a historian and Director General of the National Archives of India.)
----- -----
Comments:
The author pointed a thousand flaws in Naipaul's books. And he also highlighted something like Hindu militancy? Is there anything like that really? For Hindus, organizing together and accumulating power will never be possible because they don't follow a single book. On the other hand, the western civilizations are much more practical and should not even be compared with arabic and third world countries which are still struggling to project mystic ideologies as holy things.
from:
sateesh
Posted on: Nov 7, 2012 at 01:46 IST
---
Is Mushirul Hasan claiming that there are no political Islamists in
India or other countries with significant Muslim populations ?
The problem other religions are asking is, where is the moderate
Muslim? When Muslim extremists run riot in the streets, no one from the Muslim community questions them. Contemporary Muslim literature does not dwell in the topic of political Islam, which is a reality.
In neighboring Pakistan and Bangladesh, where minorities are
persecuted severely, not just in riots, but throughout to such an
extent, that their populations have dwindled.
Because Muslims are not standing up and questioning, it is left to
others who are outside the Muslim religion to question them.
What worries an average citizen, is that Muslim majority countries and provinces with significant Muslim populations in India, people of other religions are persecuted. But no Muslim questions them.
Is Mushirul Hasan claiming that there are no political Islamists in
India or other countries with significant Muslim populations ?
The problem other religions are asking is, where is the moderate
Muslim? When Muslim extremists run riot in the streets, no one from the Muslim community questions them. Contemporary Muslim literature does not dwell in the topic of political Islam, which is a reality.
In neighboring Pakistan and Bangladesh, where minorities are
persecuted severely, not just in riots, but throughout to such an
extent, that their populations have dwindled.
Because Muslims are not standing up and questioning, it is left to
others who are outside the Muslim religion to question them.
What worries an average citizen, is that Muslim majority countries and provinces with significant Muslim populations in India, people of other religions are persecuted. But no Muslim questions them.
from:
Ganesh
Posted on: Nov 7, 2012 at 03:00 IST
---
Mushirul Hasan is right in saying that we need writers who would help build bridges across religious, linguistic and ethinic divides. Whatever the history of each group, we are here now and belong equally to Mother India. India is one of the most diverse societies in the world. We must understand, respect and work with each other if the country is to realize its potential and India is to be an open, prosperous and civilised place for all its citizens.
Mushirul Hasan is right in saying that we need writers who would help build bridges across religious, linguistic and ethinic divides. Whatever the history of each group, we are here now and belong equally to Mother India. India is one of the most diverse societies in the world. We must understand, respect and work with each other if the country is to realize its potential and India is to be an open, prosperous and civilised place for all its citizens.
from:
Virendra Gupta
Posted on: Nov 7, 2012 at 03:37 IST
---
The writer opines "grinding down of the Buddhist-Jain culture during the period of Brahmanical revival" . What Brahminical revival ? Their population has never been more than 5% to 8% of the sub-continent population.
And where was force used to "grind down" Buddhist and Jain schools of thoughts ?
The writer opines "grinding down of the Buddhist-Jain culture during the period of Brahmanical revival" . What Brahminical revival ? Their population has never been more than 5% to 8% of the sub-continent population.
And where was force used to "grind down" Buddhist and Jain schools of thoughts ?
from:
Arun Subbu
Posted on: Nov 7, 2012 at 04:44 IST
---
“Rimsha Masih, Christian girl, arrested for blasphemy”; “Malala Yousufzai: Pakistani Girl, Nearly Killed by Taliban” for promoting education for girls – these are just two headlines emanating from a self proclaimed Islamic country. The perpetrators insist that they are following their scripture to the letter and spirit, and the religious, government and military leaders – and even the public seem to in agreement, even if reluctantly. The feeble protests to bring the perpetrators to justice seem to be just to mollify the outside world. There is a serious intellectual debate in the Islamic world: if they should resurrect the values of the first millennium or live with the current set. The religious scripture is writ; it is the final and uncompromising arbiter. And it was decidedly written not in this millennium or even the one before it. The scripture propels, and sustains the unflinching enforcers who are sure there is no other way. Naipaul’s work implies this. You be the judge.
“Rimsha Masih, Christian girl, arrested for blasphemy”; “Malala Yousufzai: Pakistani Girl, Nearly Killed by Taliban” for promoting education for girls – these are just two headlines emanating from a self proclaimed Islamic country. The perpetrators insist that they are following their scripture to the letter and spirit, and the religious, government and military leaders – and even the public seem to in agreement, even if reluctantly. The feeble protests to bring the perpetrators to justice seem to be just to mollify the outside world. There is a serious intellectual debate in the Islamic world: if they should resurrect the values of the first millennium or live with the current set. The religious scripture is writ; it is the final and uncompromising arbiter. And it was decidedly written not in this millennium or even the one before it. The scripture propels, and sustains the unflinching enforcers who are sure there is no other way. Naipaul’s work implies this. You be the judge.
from:
Anvar Naveed
Posted on: Nov 7, 2012 at 05:21 IST
---
Wow! This is such a moving piece. You have dissected the oppressive bigotry of an acclaimed but deeply flawed writer without hostility or rancour. I am not sure as to what can change Mr. Naipaul. Will he go down as another literary accident? Someone flawed walking away with the top accolades which were not so deserved?
Wow! This is such a moving piece. You have dissected the oppressive bigotry of an acclaimed but deeply flawed writer without hostility or rancour. I am not sure as to what can change Mr. Naipaul. Will he go down as another literary accident? Someone flawed walking away with the top accolades which were not so deserved?
from:
Anand
Posted on: Nov 7, 2012 at 06:05 IST
---
Well written. I do not study religious books. Mine or others. More than intent actions define the world. Actions only creates opinion not intent or content. Activities of various Islamists are against West, so it is a clash of civilizations defined by their actions, whoever may be wrong or whatever their religious book says. One kills people in name of liberty, development and democracy and other killing innocent out of anger, remorse, and bitterness.
Without changing your actions you cannot claim to be apostle for peace or can claim religion of peace. Thanks
Well written. I do not study religious books. Mine or others. More than intent actions define the world. Actions only creates opinion not intent or content. Activities of various Islamists are against West, so it is a clash of civilizations defined by their actions, whoever may be wrong or whatever their religious book says. One kills people in name of liberty, development and democracy and other killing innocent out of anger, remorse, and bitterness.
Without changing your actions you cannot claim to be apostle for peace or can claim religion of peace. Thanks
from:
H. Prasad
Posted on: Nov 7, 2012 at 08:59 IST
---
The hue of the article is dictated by the misunderstanding of the writer that Islam and Muslims are synonyms. Perhaps the book is righteous, but it matters not as long as Muslims parctice it the way they are doing so today. Clearly, his position (added in the end) is a result of the widespread appeasement that muslims enjoy today in India. Because, on one hand he accuses Naipaul of half-baked-knowledge and on the other he makes a stmt about brahmanical tyranny forgetting the public debates (about religion) held during the incident. Will a muslim agree to similar debates on Islam. If stating facts creats "distrust and promote intolerance", then its a pity but nevertheless encouraged. "Understanding and interfaith dialogue" dosent and should not mean hiding hard facts.
The hue of the article is dictated by the misunderstanding of the writer that Islam and Muslims are synonyms. Perhaps the book is righteous, but it matters not as long as Muslims parctice it the way they are doing so today. Clearly, his position (added in the end) is a result of the widespread appeasement that muslims enjoy today in India. Because, on one hand he accuses Naipaul of half-baked-knowledge and on the other he makes a stmt about brahmanical tyranny forgetting the public debates (about religion) held during the incident. Will a muslim agree to similar debates on Islam. If stating facts creats "distrust and promote intolerance", then its a pity but nevertheless encouraged. "Understanding and interfaith dialogue" dosent and should not mean hiding hard facts.
from:
Vijay
Posted on: Nov 7, 2012 at 10:37 IST
---
the views of Naipaul may be largely incorrect with respect to India, but so the defense of Mushirul Hasan. All is not bad with Islamic society, but all is not well also ,outlined by the recent violence in Chennai against the US embassy, the cutting down of the hand of a professor in Kerala some time back , the recent violence in Mumbai and descreation of Amar Jawan ,and last but not least the current state of Pakistan. Both the authors are shooting from their set positions.
the views of Naipaul may be largely incorrect with respect to India, but so the defense of Mushirul Hasan. All is not bad with Islamic society, but all is not well also ,outlined by the recent violence in Chennai against the US embassy, the cutting down of the hand of a professor in Kerala some time back , the recent violence in Mumbai and descreation of Amar Jawan ,and last but not least the current state of Pakistan. Both the authors are shooting from their set positions.
from:
harish
Posted on: Nov 7, 2012 at 11:04 IST
---
Wake up India!
Wake up World!
Life is worth living and we humans(whatsoever be the credo)just cannot afford to waste it hating any particular person or faith or society or nation or whatever it may be.
I strongly agree to Mr. Hasan -
"We need writers, poets and publicists who create mutual understanding and interfaith dialogue rather than create distrust and promote intolerance."
We, as a human, have got a long way to go ahead!
Wake up India!
Wake up World!
Life is worth living and we humans(whatsoever be the credo)just cannot afford to waste it hating any particular person or faith or society or nation or whatever it may be.
I strongly agree to Mr. Hasan -
"We need writers, poets and publicists who create mutual understanding and interfaith dialogue rather than create distrust and promote intolerance."
We, as a human, have got a long way to go ahead!
from:
Avinash Kaur
Posted on: Nov 7, 2012 at 11:34 IST
---
What a weak attempt to tarnish Hindus. The point is different Mr .
Author. Budhism Jainism and Sikhism originated in India as Hinduism.
They are different ways how people lived in India. While Islam is a religion [ i specifically say religion while other 3 are not so much
religion, may be sikhism], which came from outside and forced itself on India. It was not like India welcomed Islam as an idea or another way of living. It was forced upon India while Budhism and Jainism was not. And would you care to show us an accommodating/democratic Muslim majority country?
Yes, Arabs give us money, but not a sense of togetherness.
I am not saying there is no fault here. But those are politically
motivated radical fringes.
The point Naipaul makes is Islam and Christianity[to an extent] was forced upon India/Subcontinent. Both those were not welcomed by the natives here by getting impressed by them. There is a difference.
What a weak attempt to tarnish Hindus. The point is different Mr .
Author. Budhism Jainism and Sikhism originated in India as Hinduism.
They are different ways how people lived in India. While Islam is a religion [ i specifically say religion while other 3 are not so much
religion, may be sikhism], which came from outside and forced itself on India. It was not like India welcomed Islam as an idea or another way of living. It was forced upon India while Budhism and Jainism was not. And would you care to show us an accommodating/democratic Muslim majority country?
Yes, Arabs give us money, but not a sense of togetherness.
I am not saying there is no fault here. But those are politically
motivated radical fringes.
The point Naipaul makes is Islam and Christianity[to an extent] was forced upon India/Subcontinent. Both those were not welcomed by the natives here by getting impressed by them. There is a difference.
from:
Ramachandra
Posted on: Nov 7, 2012 at 12:01 IST
---
The author makes a reference to 'the grinding down of the Buddhist-Jain culture during the period of Brahmanical revival'. Let me state very clearly here that Buddhist-Jainist philosophies and Brahminical(Vedic)philosophies were all sheer interpretations with arguments for and against each other. We had Buddhist monks spreading Buddhism in Vedic India as a consequence of which many people including kings embraced these philosophies(or religions). After a period of time, we had the three main acharyas in the south viz. Sankara, Ramanuja and Madhva who again propagated the path of Vedic religion. Neither the Buddhist monks nor the Hindu saints called for violence as a means to preach their faith. How come the author even
attempts to make a comparison of this ideological clash with the
invasion of the Sultans and their vandalism of temples! Such a
comparison is indeed shocking.
The author makes a reference to 'the grinding down of the Buddhist-Jain culture during the period of Brahmanical revival'. Let me state very clearly here that Buddhist-Jainist philosophies and Brahminical(Vedic)philosophies were all sheer interpretations with arguments for and against each other. We had Buddhist monks spreading Buddhism in Vedic India as a consequence of which many people including kings embraced these philosophies(or religions). After a period of time, we had the three main acharyas in the south viz. Sankara, Ramanuja and Madhva who again propagated the path of Vedic religion. Neither the Buddhist monks nor the Hindu saints called for violence as a means to preach their faith. How come the author even
attempts to make a comparison of this ideological clash with the
invasion of the Sultans and their vandalism of temples! Such a
comparison is indeed shocking.
from:
raghavan k
Posted on: Nov 7, 2012 at 16:38 IST
---
While Mr. Hasan is perfectly right in criticizing V S Naipaul and his view of Islam. One cannot forget the fine distinction between the Islam as religion and tenets of Islam as interpreted by extreme
elements. We are having problem with the latter, as we notice that the extremists in Muslim communities all over the world are not ready to accommodate a view that is different from theirs and they (extremists) are often proclaiming that non-Muslims have no right to live in this world. Unfortunately, the saner elements in Muslim communities every where are being weakened day by day, and that is the reason why Naipaul and those with similar views have become more acceptable. It is also my observation that Muslims with a liberal view are losing their hold on community. There are extreme elements in the Hindu community as well but their influence is limited and liberal views of others are generally more acceptable. Better communication between Muslims and non- Muslims is required.
While Mr. Hasan is perfectly right in criticizing V S Naipaul and his view of Islam. One cannot forget the fine distinction between the Islam as religion and tenets of Islam as interpreted by extreme
elements. We are having problem with the latter, as we notice that the extremists in Muslim communities all over the world are not ready to accommodate a view that is different from theirs and they (extremists) are often proclaiming that non-Muslims have no right to live in this world. Unfortunately, the saner elements in Muslim communities every where are being weakened day by day, and that is the reason why Naipaul and those with similar views have become more acceptable. It is also my observation that Muslims with a liberal view are losing their hold on community. There are extreme elements in the Hindu community as well but their influence is limited and liberal views of others are generally more acceptable. Better communication between Muslims and non- Muslims is required.
from:
Narendra M Apte
Posted on: Nov 7, 2012 at 17:13 IST
---
The writer is suggesting crusades against Buddhism and Jainism in ancient India. This is the first time I am hearing about it. Can someone confirm this? Was there any kind of forceful conversion ? Were Buddhists and Jain shrines destroyed by Hindu kings or mobs? Till now I only know of things like declaring Buddha as ninth Avatar of Vishnu to revive Brahminism among other things. Enlighten me.
The writer is suggesting crusades against Buddhism and Jainism in ancient India. This is the first time I am hearing about it. Can someone confirm this? Was there any kind of forceful conversion ? Were Buddhists and Jain shrines destroyed by Hindu kings or mobs? Till now I only know of things like declaring Buddha as ninth Avatar of Vishnu to revive Brahminism among other things. Enlighten me.
from:
Suraj Kumar
Posted on: Nov 7, 2012 at 17:37 IST
No comments:
Post a Comment