Author: Sudhakar Raje
Publication: Organiser
Date: November 24, 2002
Introduction: If the "violent" verses
can produce the fundamentalism that today plagues the world in general
and India in particular, ones, even if far outnumbered, teach tolerance,
and, in the process, foster a catholic, secular outlook in matters religious?
Recently the Vishwa Hindu parishad
called for the elimination of some 24 anti-polytheistic (anti-idol-worshipping
Hindu) verses of Koran and Hadis. The VHP as made this suggestion in the
expectation that such elimination could help foster a better relationship
between Hindus and Muslims. But doing so would amount to amending-even
editing-the Koran, and would he condemned as blasphemous. For Islam is
one of the Semitic Religions of the book, and for followers of the Book
what is contained in it is sacrosanct and immutable. So the contents must
remain untouched for all time.
History of Koran
But what is the history of the Koran?
In his book The Koran (Penguline Classics, 1974) N.J. Dawood gives an outline
of this history and points out that the Koranic revelations did not occur
all at once, but followed each other over a period of time. Then he adds:
"During Mohammed's lifetime the verses were written on palm leaves, stones,
and any material that came to hand. Their collection was completed during
the Caliphate of Omar, the second Caliph, and an authorised version was
established during the caliphate of Othman, his successor (644-6)."
As Mohammed passed away on June
8, 632 AD, this means that at least for a decade and a half the Koran,
written on palm leaves, or inscribed on stones, or recorded on "whatever
material came to hand", lay exposed to the vagaries of climate in the inhospitable
terrain of Arabia. Further, Dawood writes that in Caliph Othman's official
version of the Koran "the chapters were arranged generally in order of
length, the longest coming first, and the shortest last". Now it is unbelievable
that the revelations came to Mohammed in such an orderly manner. That makes
this first edition of the Koran the first exercise in editing Islam.
Over the centuries this version
of the Koran must surely have gone through many editions. Then are Muslims
sure the Koran they read today is a faithful record of Mohammed's revelations?
May there not have been later motivated textual changes made to serve the
vested interest of the clergy?
Politics of contradictions
And what about the frequent and
clear contradiction in the verses that a close look at them reveals? It
is particularly noticeable in the many references to Jew, which are fulsome
in the beginning but turn inimical later Dwelling at length on this contradiction
Anwar Shaikh states in his book Islam: The Arab Imperialism that it shows
a political pattern. He calls Mohammed a great nation-builder, whose mission
was to weld not only the different Arab tribes of his time, but also the
Jewish ones living in Arabia into a united nation. He did finally succeeded
in building up a nation, which, however was an Arab nation, but failed
to bring the Jews into the Arab national mainstream. So when, in the earlier
phase of his political career, his power base was weak, Mohammed praised
the Jews as the "chosen" tribe (of-course along with the Arabs), but later,
when he felt entrenched in Power, he not only preached their extermination
but practised it himself.
Here a point of interest in the
Indian context is that the Koran damns Jews and Christians by name, but
not Hindus. This was because it was the contemporary Jews and Christians
who resisted the spread of the new religion, and he (and later his successors)
had to battle them. This was why, strange though it may seem, despite Judaism,
Christianity and Islam being all Religions of the Book, the Koran condemns
Jews and Christians as "People of the Book". In this condemnation Mohammed
included "idolators" naturally enough, because he had founded a monotheistic
religion the ruins of the Prevailing plentiful 'pagan' pantheon.
Mohammed on India
During Mohammed's times Arabia had
a substantial Hindu presence. These Hindu settlers included not only traders
and professionals of various types, but also religious preachers. There
is evidence to show that Mohammed knew about India, and it seems he had
even come into contact with, Indians. For, when his favourite wife Ayesha
fell ill she was treated and cured by a "Zut' (Jat/Hindu) physician settled
in Arabia. In those times, Indian imports were so popular with the Arabs
that their good- looking and favourite daughters are endearingly called
"Hinda" and "Saifi-Hindi". Far more important than this, Mohammed himself
once remarked, "From India comes the divine fragrance to me", writes W.H.
Siddiqi in his article "India's Contribution to Arab Civilization" in the
monumental tome India's Contribution to World Thought and Culture (Madras,
1970).
"Against this positive background
would it be really impossible to build Hindu Muslim amity on whatever positive
one can identify in the Koran? For instance, in his Vijayadashami address
last year RSS Sarsanghchalak Shri K. S. Sudarshan had quoted two such ayats-"Unto
you your religion"(Surah 109-6), and "There is no compulsion in religion"
(Surah 2-256). Anwar Shaikh also quotes these verses in his book, although
he says they belong to the early period, when Mohammed was politically
weak and his new religion needed recruits, here it would be relevant to
mention there recent controversy in the USA over a new book on the Koran,
which argues on the basis of a selection of Koranic verses that Islam is
a religion of peace. This author's plea that his projection of Islam belongs
to the "earlier time" is not without some substance, for tones of the earlier
and later periods are noticeably-some times radically-different, the earlier
verses preaching peace and tolerance, the later ones calling for extreme
violence against and a perpetual jehad on the infidel.
Tunisia teaches tolerance
But if the "violent" verses can
produce the fundamentalism that today plagues the world in general and
India in particular, cannot the "peaceful" ones, even if far outnumbered,
teach tolerance, and, in the process, foster a catholic, secular outlook
in matters religious? They can, and, surprisingly enough, they are right
now doing so in a small, Muslim African country, of all places-Tunisia.
This is happening at Zeitouna, an
Islamic University in this country that claims to be the oldest in the
world. Zeitouna's 2000 students, most of whom are preparing to become preachers
in mosques or teachers of Islam in schools, are encouraged to imbibe tolerance.
"The Koran has 125 verses at insist on religious freedom," says Zeitouna
president Mohammed Toumi, while "There is no single way to interpret Islam,"
says Mohammed Mahjoub, philosopher-editor of the University's academic
journal. And is the Zeitouna's way of interpreting Islam yielding results?
It is, a student from Mali, a predominantly Muslim West African country,
had thought, when he joined, that Islam is the only truth, and all other
teachings are false. But now, he says, "I know I was wrong.... Other religions
are just as valid..." Another student, from the Ivory Coast, says Zeitouna's
teachings have set him thinking apart from other students of Islam who
have studied at the rigid schools in the Persian Gulf. He says, "These
people think that one must grow a big beard... to be a good Muslim... Here
in Tunisia they teach us to use our own heads, instead of simply following
the Koran and the prophet's sayings."
Editing Islam
What Zeitouna dares to teach is
virtually an edited Islam, for it took the pains to identify the more than
a hundred verses preaching tolerance and devoted itself to teaching them.
Talking of an edited Islam, did not Gen. Pervez Musharraf, the dictator
of a fundamentalist and rabidly anti-Hindu Muslim state, recently order
the expunction of certain ayats of the Koran, which call upon Muslims to
wage jehad against infidels, from school textbooks in Pakistan? Of course
it is an open secret that he did this with the lowly political purpose
of currying favour with the Americans. But does the right thing done with
the wrong motive become wrong? And if it does, how about the Indian Muslim
leadership doing it with the high minded motive of national solidarity?
Secular stunts
That the contents of the Koran are
overwhelmingly given to championing hatred for and violence against 'unbelievers'
is a patent fact, all efforts at whitewashing it not with standing. Muslim
intellectuals like Mushirul Hasan have openly admitted that their efforts
at projecting Islam as a religion of peace have proved an exercise in futility,
as nobody believes them. In such a situation, instead of wasting time,
energy and intellect in the empty exercise of explaining away jehad, which
is central to Islam, as an internal, spiritual struggle, why should Muslim
intellectuals and their 'secular' sidekicks not engage in the meaningful
'exercise of identifying and stressing those parts of the Koran that could
conceivably strengthen not only Hindu-Muslim relations in India but also
amity within the human family as a whole?
For starters, why can't they set
up just one madrasa on the Zeitouna lines? If Tunisian Muslim scholars
could identify as many as 120 Koranic verses preaching religious tolerance,
why can't Indian Muslim scholars? A collection of these verses in book
form would prove a worthwhile intellectual contribution to the study of
Islam. It would explain Islam rather than explain it away. And it would
certainly be more, credible than the intellectual acrobatics indulged in
for defending the indefensible.
Even the Government, which wears
its secularism on its sleeve, could lend a helping hand. Rather than making
an exhibition of pusillanimous pseudo-secularism by way of augmenting the
official subsidy for Haj and increasing the points of departure for it
from Mumbai to Srinagar to Nagpur, it could sponsor Indian Muslim students
for study at Zeitouna. The Tunisian Government pays all expenses of foreign
students, who come not only from various nearby African countries, but
also from countries as far away as Indonesia. If Indonesia, why not India,
the country with the world's second largest Muslim population?
That famous Hadith
And finally, why does nobody care
to mention that famous Hadith: "Love of one's motherland is an integral
part of faith"? Anwar Shaikh says it shows how staunch an Arab nationalist
the Prophet was. Then what prevents the Indian followers of the Prophet
from loving their motherland, India, as fervently as the Prophet loved
his motherland, Arabia?
