KISHORE ASTHANA
I have been reading Saeed Naqvi’s well-written book, Being the Other. He is a skilled wordsmith and his book is worth reading. However if one goes through this book with an open and questioning mind, some things do not survive the light of unbiased logic. There are many discourses on the deterioration of relations between religions in India. Un-fortunately most commentators, who write on this, look at the angst felt by only one side, without realising that the reaction of the other side is often an echo of the actions of the first side.
Unfortunately, in today’s India, our media, our politicians and our journalists are more intent on promoting divisiveness than harmony. They highlight negatives do not mention the posi-tives in our society, even though the negatives are few and far between and the positives an everyday affair. The 24×7 focus is only on the few spots of black in a huge and colourful social milieu ei-ther because of considerations of economics – read TRPs – or vote-block politics or real religious convictions. Yes, the black is there, as it is in every society, but the ignored colour-ful social discourse still exists in far greater volume.
There are many examples. Take the Gujarat violence. These were a reaction to the burning of kar sevaks returning from Ayodhya. Some apologists try to make out as if the kar sevaks committed suicide at Godhra by burning themselves and the Hindus then took this as an excuse to kill Muslims. In his book, even Saeed Naqvi uses wordplay to imply that the kar sewaks were killed in a fire which might have been ignited as a result of a conspiracy hatched by Narendra Modi. He says, “The by-election from Rajkot would give him (Modi) a seat in the Assembly but only by a margin of 14,728 votes. For a long innings in Gujarat, he would have to do something on a bigger scale. Perhaps it was only a coincidence that this was the state of play when Coach S-6 of Sabarmati Express was set alight.” This unbecom-ing of a leading journalist of Naqvi’s stature. Instead of trying to unify, such a mindset makes reconciliation exceedingly difficult.
Does the train burning at Godhra excuse the Gujarat violence? Definitely not. The guilty should certainly be severely punished, as the guilty should be punished for burning the train. However, the reality of action and reaction must be dealt with in a manner such that this kind of thing does not happen again. This means that Muslims must acknowledge that the train burning was utterly wrong. Similarly, Hindus must acknowledge that killing Muslims and destroying their property was equally wrong. Only then can harmony prevail.
Unfortunately, what we see is just the reverse. Most Muslims are only focused on Muslims killed and most Hindus on Hindus burnt in the train. For both, the other is indeed the ‘Other’ and their dead worthy of no consideration.
Saeed Naqvi complains that Muslims feel like the ‘Other’ in India. He bemoans the fact that the Ganga Jamuni discourse has been vitiated on religious grounds. My view is somewhat different. I feel that ‘Being the Other’ is based on attitude and not religion. Let me explain.
When I am with my good friend, Salima or Ayesha. Or with Rehmati or Iqbal. I do not have a feeling of Being the Other. Nor do I have this with Peer Baksh, who works in a glass-cutting shop or his smiling Mensan daughter, Rubina. I do not feel I am the Other when dis-cussing skill development with my fellow IIMA alumnus, Amir. I do not have this feeling when I interact with Rana Safvi on twitter or when I meet Shahnawaz Hussain or MJ Akbar.
On the other hand, I feel I am the Other when I listen to Zakir Naik or Hafiz Saeed or a Christian priest waxing eloquent in order to convert. I feel I am the Other when I hear a saf-fron garbed sadhvi make inflammatory statements, or hear of cow-protection vigilantes beating up Scheduled Castes people or a temple priest disallowing entry to a SC family. I feel I am the Other when I find Hindus refusing to eat food prepared by Dalits, or Madarsas refusing to accept food from Hindu organisations.
Muslims have no monopoly on poverty, hardship or even discrimination in India. Ask the families of hundreds of farmers belonging to all religions who commit suicide every year. Then there is one important causal factor that is widely ignored when considering the overall state of Muslims in India – during partition, much of the cream of Indian Muslims left India to form their own country. This naturally depleted the reserves of the community left behind.
Why then are the problems of Muslims aired more than the problems of the other, perhaps worse off, underprivileged Indians? Why do our politicians keep harping on these, though their words are not matched by action? It is just that, rightly or wrongly, Muslims are considered a consolidated voting block and their problems are highlighted more in the media and voiced more loudly than those of others by those wishing to curry favour. This encourages an attitude of entitlement based on a sense of exaggerated victim-hood.
Unfortunately, in today’s India, our media, our politicians and our journalists are more intent on promoting divisiveness than harmony. They highlight negatives do not mention the posi-tives in our society, even though the negatives are few and far between and the positives an everyday affair. The 24×7 focus is only on the few spots of black in a huge and colourful social milieu ei-ther because of considerations of economics – read TRPs – or vote-block politics or real religious convictions. Yes, the black is there, as it is in every society, but the ignored colour-ful social discourse still exists in far greater volume.
It is the responsibility of people like Saeed Naqvi, who are well-regarded and who can write well to promote the ‘Same’ rather than the ‘Other’., to do so His colleagues in the media should focus on the harmonious, too.