Author: J N Raina
Publication: The Free Press Journal
Date: June 11, 2002
That "Islam is in danger" is the
common refrain of jehadis. Jehad (holy war ) is not only between Islam
and Christianity, but it is considered against all those who do not believe
in Islam. But why is their ( jehadis' ) mindset at variance with other
faiths? Why are they instilled with killer instincts ? The holy war is
against infidels. According to the Oxford Dictionary, an infidel is one
" who has no religion or whose religion is not that of the majority ".But
those who have no religion are very few. A majority of people either believe
in one religion or the other.
Lakhs of jehadis are being churned
out through a mushroom growth of madrassas in India and abroad. They are
being fed upon literature which is galling and obnoxious. Please read the
following carefully: " It is our opinion that whoever claims the acceptability
of any existing religion today- other than Islam- such as Judaism, Christianity
and so forth, is a non-believer. He should be asked to repent; if he does
not, he must be killed as an apostate because he is rejecting the Quran".
The above paragraph is contained
in chapter V , in a 32-page booklet titled " The Muslim's Belief",forming
part of the madrassa curriculum, run by the Muslim fundamentalist organizations-
The Tablighi Jamaat, The Jamaat-e-Islami, The Jamaat-e-Ulema, Ahle Hadees-
( influenced by the highly orthodox Wahabi philosophy)- in association
with the ISI, funded by Saudi Arabia and several other Islamic nations.
The booklet in English, authored
by Shaikh Muhammad A-Saleh Al-Uthaimin, in Arabic, has been circulated
by the Jeddah D'awah Center (JDC) In Saudi Arabia, for teaching Islam in
Jeddah. The original has been translated by Dr Maneh Hammad Al-Johani.
The booklet has originated from
Hyderabad , where it is being distributed in the madrassas. The very definition
of the word " infidel" is significant. "...whose religion is not that of
the majority..." Muslims in general have a propensity to live huddled together
in joint clusters . Wherever they form majority, there will be conflict
with the people of other faiths.
The book has been printed under
the supervision of the Ministry of Islamic Affairs, Endowments, Propagation
and Guidance, Saudi Arabian Government. Again coming to chapter V of the
booklet (page 21), there is a sub-heading which reads as : " Islam The
Universal and Final Message". It runs as follows:
" - We believe that the Shari'ah
of the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon Him, is the religion of Islam which
Allah has chosen for His servants and does not accept from anyone other
religion, because Allah, the Exalted, said ' Surely, the true religion
in Allah's sight is Islam'(3:19), and He also said 'Today I have perfected
your religion for you and I have completed my favour upon you, and I have
chosen Islam to be your religion ( 5:3) And 'whoever desires a religion
other than Islam, it will never be accepted from Him, and in the hereafter
he will be among the losers'( 3: 85)."
Noted Editor M J Akbar, in his just
published book " The Shade of Swords : Jehad and the conflict between Islam
and Christianity", speaks of two types of jehad - jehad al Akbar ( the
war against the enemy within ) and jehad al Asghar- the lesser jehad, that
is fought on the battlefield. There is nothing wrong about jehad al Akbar,
if it remains confined to one's weaknesses. But jehad against kafirs (
infidels) is aimless and should be treated as outdated. Otherwise, there
can be no universal peace . There is no conflict either if jehad is resorted
to against an enemy on the battlefield. But if it takes the form of terrorism,
it amounts to abuse of Islam.
We are witness to ugly happenings
in Afghanistan, where jehad was waged for 13 years against Communism. Even
after lethal U S -led operations to " finish" Taliban and Osama bin Laden,
the symbol of Islamic terrorism, we have failed in this endeavour , because
of hatred espoused through these madrassas.
Saad Mehio, a regular contributor
to the Daily Star in Lebanon has said " when Cold War ended in 1989, political
exploitation of Islam continued". This he said was exemplified in the financing
of ( with petro-dollars) some 7500 religious schools in Pakistan, India
and the Arab world. The schools taught only isolationism, backwardness
and hostility.
Jehadis have only helped in keeping
the masses ignorant and prevented Muslims from improving their lot, politically
and economically". Prime Minister A B Vajpayee was taken to task when he
drew a parallel between two contradictory streams of Islam. " I had said
Islam has two forms. One is that which tolerates others, which teaches
its adherents to follow the path of truth, which preaches compassion and
sensitivity." But these days, he continued "militancy in the name of Islam
leaves no room for tolerance. It has raised the slogan of jehad. It is
dreaming of reaching the entire world in its mould". What wrong he had
committed?
A need has arisen to rebuff any
ideological, political or religious justification for terrorism. Even the
British Government has come to realise that terrorists waging " Islamic
jehad" cannot be equated with the so-called freedom fighters in Kashmir.
Nations that are victims of terrorism have an obligation to protect their
people against terrorism, which has formed part of the "international brigade
of Islam", as per expert opinion. Documents seized from terrorists recently
has confirmed their determination to continue with " indiscriminate violence
in the name of Allah till India is destroyed".
If the present conflict between
India and Pakistan continues, India should raise the costs for Pakistan
for sponsoring terrorism. Islamist militancy continues to smoulder in many
regions. The world is today at the brim of disaster. Politicians and diplomats
may diminish the truth about nuclear dust -tinged war clouds hovering above
the subcontinent , but ostensibly, we are precariously perched on a huge
volcano , which if it erupts, can engulf millions of innocent people in
its wake.
Even the U S President George W
Bush, who has so far been beating about the bush on the question of waging
war on global terrorism, felt nervous about the utterances of Pakistan's
dictator Gen Pervez Musharraf. The dictator's permanent representative
at the United Nations, Munir Akram, has by his awkward posturing astounded
the U N in New York that Pakistan will not hesitate to unfold its nuclear
umbrella against India, even if this country continue to make use of only
conventional weapons. But Musharraf, known for his flip-flop diplomacy,
made a u-turn on the eve of his departure for Almaty summit in Kazakhistan
and nailed down Akram's U N statement as that of an " insane".
Dictators have their own ways. History
is replete with such instances. Ultimately they have got defeated whenever
world leaders united against brutal acts. Adolf Hitler is still a household
name, though negatively, evoking revulsion. He had become the greatest
living horror, who had turned Germany into a " Nation of savage beasts
and "plunged the world into a terrifying nightmare".
For he had once said angrily " The
world is against me now, but the day will come when I shall teach the world
a lesson." So blows hot and cold Gen Musharraf, and so does Osama bin Laden,
the greatest terror upon this earth. It is Saudi Arabia from where " raving
maniacs" like Osama are being culled out.
The general argument in defence
of the madrassa culture is that pupils are inculcated pure Islamic teaching
in these institutions. On the contrary, it is not so. The madrassa culture
has attained a different hue since jehad became the elixir of life for
jehadis, since the policy of" hate and divisiveness" became part of the
Islamic culture, and when most of the Muslims started harbouring " trans-national
loyalties".
The trouble also came to the fore
when army rulers in Pakistan were imbued with a desire that it cannot rule
without the " elixir of Kashmir" and pushed the agenda of keeping the conflict
alive. There are hundreds of madrassas in Jammu and Kashmir , run by the
Jamaat-e-Islami. Neither late Sheikh Abdullah nor his son, Chief Minister
Farooq Abdullah had courage enough to shut down these schools, which have
served as breeding grounds for home-grown terrorists.
It is obligatory on the world Muslim
community to preserve the true image of this religion Should Islam be represented
by terrorists like Osama or should they seek to present a rational, moderate
image of Islam?
In the near future it will be possible
to repulse a nuclear attack, but difficult to fight the menace of jehadism.
According to Saad Mehio, the West, the US, Arabs and other Muslim tyrannies
have all used the political weapon of Islam for their ulterior purposes,
and all are paying the price.
Pakistan should exercise its authority
through the chosen representatives of the people and not through the representatives
of God. Today we need leaders like Gamel Abdul Nasser of Egypt, who had
struggled against the " Muslim Brothers" for most of his political life.
Pt Jawaharlal Nehru , his contemporary, had equally marginalized Hindu
extremist forces in India. Time is still not out to curb such tendencies
at ab initio.
A large section of people in Pakistan
feel that " Pakistan need not sacrifice its interests for Kashmiris". Such
feelings exist in India too. People in Pakistan should mobilize genuine
leadership to preserve its hard-earned freedom, along with India.
If India and Pakistan even resort
to limited war, that is bound to confluence into a nuclear war. Imagine
the consequences. And who will gain? The same imperialist forces which
had enslaved people of the sub-continent. The imperialists are still dreaming
of an " age of Empire".
British Prime Minister Tony Blair
in a recent alarming statement has given a call for what is known as "
defensive imperialism". The call came through a pamphlet which was distributed
at the Bonn talks, that produced the interim Hamid Karzai administration
in Afghanistan. Blair has said: " Like the old empire, Western countries
would have to deal with old-fashioned states outside the post-modern continent
of Europe, with the rougher methods of an earlier era forces, preemptive
attack, deception, whatever is necessary to deal with those who still live
in the 19th century ".
If the Kashmir imbroglio is allowed
to linger on endlessly, will not people like Blair and his cohorts take
an advantage and give shape to his well orchestrated dreams?
