|
The world has changed, experts and lay people alike are proclaiming since September 11, 2001 when the most spectacular and complex act of terrorism ever conceived and enacted upon brought to rubble America’s symbols of might and power. The non-stop coverage of events since that shocking morning has left us mostly benumbed, and not very well informed. That kind of 24 hour coverage, with the same list of experts pontificating, humming and hawing, prevaricating, and speaking psycho-political babble is indicative of one thing at least: the world really has changed and NOT changed! Americans in general, and the American media in particular, continue to be misinformed, blinkered, and provincial. No doubt that what we are hearing on radio, watching on TV, and reading in the major newspapers will merely reinforce in the minds of Americans the images of the world, the status of world’s religions, the nature of the threat of terrorism, and the role of the world’s players.
For example, it is amazing to see the difference between Indian and American media perceptions of the events and the actors. The Indian press is clear about Pakistan’s role in supporting the Taliban. The U.S. media, in general, are ignoring the Indian and Pakistani dimension and the dynamic in the region that should tell them that it is India which has suffered the brunt of the “Mad Mullahs’ Disease”, and it is Pakistan that has both concocted the disease and is spreading it. The American inability to understand clearly this simple and basic feature of the problem is inexplicable to outsiders, and to most Indian-Americans.
Also, note how most Muslim countries have closed ranks - they are Muslim first, and concerned about world civilisation second. This must be emphasised to Americans because they still do not want to accept the magnitude of the Islamic militant threat. But that is easier said than done. Why? Simply because the United States is first and foremost a Christian nation, and the two biggest religions and the only exclusivist religions in the world are Christianity and Islam. Christians and Muslims share too much in common for Americans to understand the nature of the claim that Allah is the only God, and Mohammed the last prophet manufactured in God’s mint. Hey, what is wrong with it, they think. They are just like us!
I just watched the national prayer meeting held at the National Cathedral, U.S., to mourn the victims of Tuesday’s tragedies. All the religious, peace, and spiritual messages were delivered by Christian priests, starting with the tried, tested and very old Billy Graham, and by rabbis and even a Muslim mullah. The same happened on Wednesday, September 12, when Bill Moyers led a discussion among religious leaders on WNET TV about the role of faith and religion in these trying times. Christianity, Islam, and Judaism were represented. All these are Abrahamic faiths. No one else was called, none other represented. Neither Hindu nor Sikh, nor Buddhists nor Jains, nor African animists nor Haitian witch doctors. May be, and to all purposes, for many Americans any talk about Hinduism is the same as talk about the incomprehensible ritual performed by voodoo practitioners! So much for the contribution of Indian-Americans to the rich and multicultural society that is America. Or is the ignoring of Hindus because we are a peace loving lot and ours is not an exclusive “religion”?
There is also the politically correct talk that it is not religion, in this case Islam, which is at fault, nor the majority of Muslims but a handful of extremists who are misusing religion. I believe that at this point in time, at least in the U.S., it is important not to fan religious animosity or hatred. After all, the ordinary American cannot and does not want to know the differences between peoples and their faiths. So, the people many have mistaken to be Muslims have been Sikhs because the Sikhs wear turbans and beards! A turban, is a turban, is a turban, and a beard is a beard, is a beard. What matters that the Bin Ladens and his Muslim brethren wear their caps and turbans and their beards differently. Poor, hapless Sikhs. (http://www.rediff.com/us/2001/sep/14ny3.htm; http://www.rediff.com/us/2001/sep/13ny2.htm)
But in the long run, hiding behind politically correct talk ignores one of the fundamental and basic driving forces behind conflict: religion. There are good and decent Muslims no doubt, and to keep reiterating that is in fact must be galling to many Muslims. These Muslims say that “the Koran and Islam do not preach hatred and violence. It says that the way to influence ‘non-believers’ is through personal character of peace and tolerance”. They proclaim that the term jihad is grossly misunderstood. The true meaning of jihad is “fight against ignorance,” they point out. To these people the problem simply is that mullahs and zealots have used jihad for their own political and personal gains.
However, just as the proof of the pudding is in the eating, the nature of a religion is in its practice. One of my friends pointed out to the good Muslim who wrote about Islam and its tenet of love and acceptance that in a translation of the Koran (“The Koran”, translated by A. J. Arberry, Simon & Schuster, New York), verse IX.5 says: “Then when the sacred months are drawn away, slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them, confine them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they repent, and perform prayer, and pay the alms, then let them go their way.”
Muslims have many varied teachings depending on who is teaching. Also, the same preacher can and does change the message depending on who the audience is. Thus, while not disputing the many statements of love and peace in the Koran, one should not ignore the fact that both kinds of messages get promoted by Islam depending upon the situation. As my friend remarked, “The existence of a loaded gun is not negated by the mere existence of positive things alongside, because the use of the weapon is at the discretion of its owner. Given the long history of misuse of the Koran to plunder, conquer, enslave, kill lakhs of persons in India (as evidenced by chronicles of Islamic scholars who accompanied the invaders), why not remove these dangerous weapons in the first place? In other words, why not amend such verses so they may not be misused at the sole discretion of some mullah? God has become misused as a weapon of mass destruction!
My friend does not merely want to focus on Islam, for there are enough calls to violence and discrimination in many of the world’s religious texts. Therefore, amendments to the holy books of all religions, by a panel of scholars from various religions could be the first step in changing the world for the 21st century.
What makes such a project difficult though is that any such proposal is deemed blasphemous, rather than as honest attempts to strengthen the religions of the world. Any attempts to reinterpret or modernise the Koran are negated even by those Muslims who seem very liberal in their views. How could a document written for desert tribes of uneducated persons 1300 years ago be left in its original interpretation in the 21st century, my friend queries.
Disclaimer |
 |
