Pluralism in Indian Religious Tradition

Arif Mohammed Khan

What is religion (Dharma)? The Brhadaranyaka Upanishad responds to this question by a thunderclap, da da da. It means dama, daan and dayaa, self control, charity and compassion. Indian tradition holds these values as three basic ingredients of religion.

Swami Vivekanand has defined religion as manifestation of divinity that already exists in man. He says that “Each soul is potentially divine. The goal is to manifest this divine within, by controlling nature external and internal. Do this either by work or worship or psychic control or philosophy, by one or more or all of these and be free. This is the whole of religion. Doctrines or dogmas or rituals or books or temples or forms are but secondary details.”

It is this weltanschauung of human soul that has permeated Indian religious tradition since time immemorial and has led to recognition of the right of each and every individual to approach the Creator in a manner and mode of his or her choice as reflected in the inimitable words of Swami Ramkrishna Paramhansa who said YAT MAT TAT PATH (To each individual is his way).

It is important to remember that the pluralism of the names that are given to the Divine or the ways that are pursued to reach the Divine have been likened to the streams having sources in different places finally mingling their waters into one great sea. Similarly men prompted by their unique dispositions take different paths that ultimately lead to One Cosmic Reality. The concept of One God and many paths and One God permeating all souls has been known as EKESHWARWAD or ADWAIT (Monism or Non-Duality). Traditions like Bhakti movement which strive to merge the finite with the inexhaustible infinite are the logical shootouts of belief in non-duality.

We can say that Indian pluralism emphasizing universal acceptance and not just tolerance of diverse religious traditions is not a modern day innovation rather it is deeply rooted in religious and spiritual ethos and reflected in the lives of great spiritual leaders of India.

We have an interesting story about Shankaracharya, the great teacher of ADWAITA, who is given credit for renewing Hinduism in 8th century. While in Varansi he used to go for his dip in Ganges every morning. One day he found a Chandal (an untouchable) standing and asked him to move off his path. The Chandala enquired whom he was calling off to move, the body or soul. This remark awakened Shankaracharya to his belief in ADWAITA and he fell at once at the feet of Chandala as if he were his Guru and composed famous Manish PANCHAKA of five SHLOKAS which has a refrain 'He who has learnt to look upon all as Brahman is really my Guru, be he a Brahmin or a Chandala.

There is another fascinating story about Swami Ramkrishna Paramhans, a great ADWAITA teacher of 19th century. He was very fond of ice cream and one day he heard a vendor calling out in the street. The vendor was summoned but when he found the vendor to be a Muslim, he instinctively decided not to buy the eatable from him and dismissed him. After the vendor left, his strong ADWAITA consciousness stung Swamiji to the quick and he recognized his fall from that supreme height in his behavior in having wounded a Muslim Vendor. He immediately rushed to call him back and bought of him the ice cream and ate it in his presence with great joy.

Unlike Western world, Indian pluralism had no occasion to struggle against religion rather it is nourished and cherished by religion itself.

Quran on Sanctity of Life

Arif Mohammed Khan

Terrorists quoting Quran have become evil symbol of our age. To a terrorist the human life is dispensable to secure his political goals and religion is a handy tool to justify his crime. This has created a twofold challenge before the civil society; to protect their lives and religion both from the onslaught of terror.

Let us see what Quran says about human life and human tendency to use religion to gain temporal gains or advantages.

Quran declares that man is God’s vicegerent on earth and that God has endowed him with honor and dignity: “We have honored the Children of Adam; provided them with transport on land and sea; given them for sustenance things good and pure; and conferred on them special favors above a great part of Our Creation. (17.70)

Further it is said that all that is in heavens and on earth has been subjugated to mankind: “And He has subjected to you as from Him all that is in the heavens and on earth” (45.13).

It is important to note that all the verses that talk of vicegerency of man or conferment of honor and dignity and subjugation of nature to man are of general character and not specific to the group of believers. These are divinely ordained rights and can be described as shared heritage of mankind or basic human rights that cannot be altered or alienated by any government.

From this status flow all other rights including the right to life that has been declared as sacred. Quran says: “take not life which Allah has made sacred except by way of justice and law (6.151 & 17.33) and “shed no blood amongst you nor turn out your people from your homes (2.84).

Quran underlines the sanctity of human life by equating it with whole mankind and declares: “if anyone slew a person unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if anyone saved a life it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people (5.32).

Then there are other verses of Quran strictly forbidding killing of girl child (81.8) or taking one’s own life (4.29) to uphold the principle of inviolability of life.

Now let us examine the question of using religion for pursuing worldly gains including political domination or expansion of dominion. Quran denounces this human tendency in more than 30 verses. It categorically declares: “Woe to those who write the Book with their own hands and then say: "This is from Allah" to traffic with it for a miserable price! Woe to them for what their hands do write and for the gain they make thereby.” (2.79)

On the other hand in more than 40 verses, Quran exhorts the faithful to spend worldly wealth to gain religious merit. It says: "Seek with the (wealth) which Allah has given you the Home of the Hereafter, nor forget your portion in this world, but do good as Allah has been good to you” (28.77). It further assures that looking after the kindred, the needy and wayfarer ensures prosperity (30.38).

History has recorded the last prophetic will consisting of a verse saying: “That House of the Hereafter, We give to those who seek neither dominance nor mischief in the earth for God loves not mischief makers” (28.83). But as Quran itself says everyone does not get light from this Book of wisdom, some go astray: “By it he misleads many and many he guides thereby. And he misleads thereby those who are rebellious” (2.26). 

Asking for Moon: Sighting of Eid Moon

Asking for Moon

Eid, the most important Muslim festival, is marked by controversy involving the sighting of moon almost every year. To the embarrassment of the faithful, various clerics make conflicting statements and occasionally it becomes impossible to celebrate it together on one day.

In an age when it has become possible to measure the movements of various planets including moon with almost total accuracy, the refusal of Muslim clergy to make use of the scientific knowledge and insistence on literal approach to Shariah results in difference of about two to three days in observing Ramadan and Eid all over the Muslim world.

They solely rely on the Hadith where the Blessed Prophet has said: "Begin fasting when you see the new moon, and end fasting when you see the new moon, and when you cannot see it then complete the 30 days" But in another tradition the rationale for this physical sighting has been explained in detail: “We are a people (Ummah) who are unlettered (Ummiyah), we do not write (in astronomical circles) nor do we calculate (to arrive at the exact lunar dates)”

Arab Historian Baladhuri has recorded that during the time of Prophet there were only 17 persons in Mecca and 11 in Medina who possessed the ability to read and write. They picked up rudimentary knowledge while on trade trips to Syria and Jerusalem, as there existed no schools or books in Arabia. In these circumstances the importance of relying on moon for calculation of time cannot be overemphasized.

But the impact of the teachings of the Prophet created such hunger for knowledge that a society that was described by Quran as the society of illiterates became great recipients and keepers of knowledge from all corners of the world within next 200 years. He made it mandatory for his followers, men and women both, to seek knowledge and told them that wisdom is the lost property of the faithful and they should receive it from wherever they can find it. He further said that the superiority of the learned man over the devout is like that of the full moon, over the stars and described the scholars as the heirs of the Prophets.

In addition to the sayings of the Prophet, Quran itself highlights the importance of wisdom in more than 600 verses. The Quran describes animals, birds, trees, ships, mountains, rivers, oceans, winds, rains, sun, moon, stars and other physical phenomenon as divine signs asking man to observe them and contemplate about them and then tells him that “He (God) it is Who created for you all that is on earth”. It is clear from these verses that through observation and contemplation man can learn about the nature of things and subsequently he can use this knowledge for the advancement, progress and comfort of mankind. Quran further asserts that man has been given the faculties to acquire knowledge but laments lack of effort on his part: “It is He Who has created for you (the faculties of) hearing, sight, feeling and understanding: little thanks it is you give.” (23.78)

The Islamic perception is that wisdom is manifestation of knowledge that exists potentially in every soul. It is like seed in the soil that grows into a fruit bearing tree by the process of learning and training. Learning leads to wisdom that has been described by Quran as (KHAIRAN KATHEERA) “abundant good”. By refusing to utilize the scientific input to determine the appearance of moon, we deny ourselves this abundant good and the joy of celebrating the Eid together in harmony.

Sir Syed on Jihad

Sir Syed on Jihad

There is a striking similarity between the uprising of 1857 in India and the 9/11 terrorists attacks on WTC in USA. Both events sparked a heated public debate on the question of Jihad in Islamic law and the obligation of Muslims in respect of calls to Jihad by clerics or private individuals

After quelling the uprising, the British came down heavily on the Muslims, whom they suspected of being the main fomenters of the revolt in fulfillment of Jihad obligation. In fact Lord Mayo mooted the question “Are the Indian Muslims bound by their religion to revolt against the Queen?

In 1871 Sir William Hunter, who was asked to investigate the causes of widespread disaffection among Muslims, produced a book titled ‘The Indian Musalmans” in which he asserted “The Musalmans of India are and have been for many years, a chronic danger to the British power in India”.

Sir Syed wrote a review of the book and strongly refuted the allusions of Hunter with particular reference to his poor understanding of Jihad in Islam. He emphatically asserted that “as long as the Muslims can affirm their faith in One God and preach it in peace, the religion does not permit them to rise against the rulers irrespective of their faith or race”.

In addition to this review Sir Syed wrote extensively to elucidate the concept of Jihad in Islam and in commentary of Quran Sir Syed wrote that Islam has permitted only two eventualities in which Muslims may resort to armed action. First if enemy motivated by the desire to annihilate the religion attacks the Muslims, then they can take to arms to repulse such attack. But this measure of self defense shall be qualified as Jihad only if it is certain that the aggression has been committed purely on account of enmity towards Islam and not for any territorial or worldly gains. Any other conflict, be it between the two contending Muslims parties or between Muslims and non-Muslims, is strictly a temporal affair and has nothing to do with religion.

The other ground that justifies armed action is when Muslims on account of their religion are denied safety and security and freedom of religion and its practice. In this context Sir Syed points out that armed action can be taken only by a free people to help the oppressed not by the oppressed themselves if they are living as a subject people. Their option is either to endure the oppression or migrate to some other land.

Sir Syed describes it as the beautiful way out shown by Islam and asserts that this is the armed action that Islam permits and has named it as Jihad. He then asks, can any fair-minded person describe this action to be against the principles of morality or justice.

Further he asserts that Islam admits no scope for mischief, treachery, mutiny or rebellion. In fact, whosoever guarantees peace and security, be he a believer or disbeliever, is entitled to Muslim gratitude and obedience.

Sir Syed describes the laws of war in Islam as just and noble but blames the Muslim rulers for their barbarism and profaning these pure laws.  He also accused the Ulema (clergy) of violating the noble spirit of Islam by defending these rulers.  Sir Syed held that rulers like Mahmood Ghaznavi and Aurangzeb who oppressed people, did so in breach of Islam, their accountability is personal and individual and their evil deed must not be attributed to Islam.

The Indian herb that went to Persia

Law, History & Order

Arif Mohammed Khan

The Indian herb that went to Persia

Verily there exists in this world no purifier like knowledge. Gita 4.38

The 10th century Iranian poet Firdausi in his epic Shahnameh gives an interesting account of how the Indian classic Panchatantra — the embodiment of sensible counsel for wise conduct in the form of fables — travelled to Persia in 550 AD. He gives an idea of the importance that is attached to knowledge and wisdom in Indian tradition.

According to Shahnameh, during the reign of Anushirvan, his chief physician Burzoy informed the king that he had heard about the existence of a herb [Sanjivni] in the mountains of India, which could bring the dead back to life. He sought the king’s permission to go to India and find the miraculous herb. King Anushirvan readily approved the proposal and wrote a personal letter to his Indian counterpart, requesting him to extend the necessary assistance to his envoy so that he could find the herb.

The Indian king welcomed Burzoy on his arrival, and after learning about the nature of his mission, deputed a large team of scholars and officials to help him locate Sanjivni. With the local team in attendance, Burzoy went to the Himalayas, and after moving from one valley to another and after covering large areas, he finally succeeded in locating the herb. Burzoy prepared the potion according to the manual and sprinkled it over various corpses provided for his experiment. To his utter disappointment, the potion failed to produce the promised results. Burzoy was extremely distressed and worried how he would face the king and his people on his return.

A crestfallen Burzoy asked his Indian assistants to find some way to salvage his mission. They took him to an old sage who lived in a secluded place. After Burzoy explained the purpose of his visit, the sage said, “O Burzoy, you did not understand the allegory of the ancients. By the mountain they meant the learned, by the dead they meant the ignorant and by herb they meant knowledge and wisdom.”

The sage explained to Burzoy that when the learned man imparted knowledge and wisdom to the ignorant, then only was he revived to life: “The herb [wisdom] you have been looking for is not in the Himalayas but it is in the safe custody of your host the king, in the form of a book called Panchatantra. If you seek this book and accumulate its wisdom, then it will be the real miraculous herb that will become a source to bring back your dead to life.”

After hearing this new interpretation, Burzoy approached the king once again and told him that the metaphorical herb he was looking for was actually a book of wisdom kept in the royal treasury. Burzoy expressed his desire to see the book. The king agreed reluctantly, on the condition that Burzoy attended the court daily to read and understand the book in royal presence. Burzoy did accordingly and on each following day he read the book, memorised it and wrote it down in his own language, Pahalvi.

This was how the Panchatantra was first translated into Persian, and then in 750 AD Ibn Muqaffa translated the book into Arabic under the title of Kalilah wo Dimnah. The impact of the book can be judged from the fact that scholars hold it responsible for the rise of a new eclectic sect in Islam, known as Ikhwan al-Safa [Brethren of Purity]. Today, with more than 200 versions in 60 languages, the Panchatantra continues to bring the dead back to life.

Arif Mohammed Khan is a former Union Minister

KEEP IT TOGETHER

28 Aug 2008, 0005 hrs IST, ARIF MOHAMMED KHAN

Neither liberalism nor democracy admits ruling people against their will. Democracy is not about ruling people, it is about a periodic selection of a group, by the people, for exercising power on their behalf for a defined time-frame.

I think it is unfair to describe Kashmir's relationship with the rest of India in terms of colonialism of a hue different from the classic one or to compare it with Junagadh, the tiny Muslim state in Gujarat, that had acceded to Pakistan but later integrated with India.

As far as Kashmir is concerned, the Maharaja had signed a standstill agreement with Pakistan on August 15, 1947, that the "existing arrangements should continue pending settlement of details and execution of a fresh agreement". The Maharaja had approached India also but received no positive response.

The Indian attitude can be judged from what V P Menon has written in the 'Integration of States': "We wanted time to examine its implications. We left the state alone. I for one had simply no time to think of Kashmir".

But despite the agreement Pakistan imposed economic blockade on Kashmir to bring pressure on the Maharaja to accede to Pakistan. In October it organised an invasion of Kashmir by army regulars in the guise of tribals.

The invaders entered Muzaffarabad on October 22, 1947 and indulging in a spree of loot and arson reached Baramulla on October 27. They created such mayhem that out of the 14,000 people of this predominantly Muslim town, only 3,000 survived.

This situation forced the Maharaja to dispatch his envoy to Delhi requesting aid on October 24, but India made it clear that Indian troops could be sent only to an area that was part of India, and Kashmir could do so by signing the instrument of accession.

The Indian troops landed in Srinagar on October 27 only after the Maharaja had duly signed the accession instrument. Sheikh Abdullah, who was present in Delhi, also endorsed the request for Indian assistance with accession.

The important question is who resisted the invaders for five days till Indian help arrived. This question has been best answered by T N Dhar, a long-time critic of Sheikh Abdullah. He has written: "The National Conference leaders considered it a breach of trust and a challenge to the self-respect of Kashmiris and since the organization was deeply entrenched at the grass-root level... the entire population was electrified with repulsion for Pakistan". Not just National Conference volunteers, the entire population stood up against the Pakistani invaders and supported Kashmir's accession to India.

On the other hand in Junagadh, before independence, the nawab repeatedly expressed solidarity with the surrounding Kathiawar states and on April 22, 1947, the official Gazette of Junagadh reproduced a speech of the Junagadh prime minister categorically repudiating allegations that Junagadh was thinking of joining Pakistan. The constitutional adviser of the nawab informed Mountbatten that he had advised the ruler to accede to India.

However, on August 15, 1947, Junagadh, a state that had no common boundary with Pakistan, announced accession to Pakistan under the advice of the new prime minister who was a member of the Muslim League. After receiving this information the government of India sent a note to Pakistan on August 21, explaining that India found it necessary to consult the views of Junagadh's population and asking for an indication of Pakistan's policy in this matter.

Further, on September 12, a telegram was sent to Pakistan stating that India would abide by the verdict of the people of Junagadh. The only reply that India received the next day was that Pakistan had accepted the accession of Junagadh.

It is true that India had stationed troops outside Junagadh, but it did not intervene militarily. It is important to remember that there were autonomous states inside Junagadh, which had already announced their accession to India and asked for Indian protection.

It was not the military action by India but a popular uprising against the nawab that forced him to flee to Pakistan by the end of October. Later, the prime minister of Junagadh wrote to Jinnah explaining the difficulties of Junagadh and through another communique requested the government of India to take over the administration, which was done on November 9, 1947.

Pakistan wanted to have Kashmir because it had a Muslim majority and Hyderabad, Junagadh and Manadar because the rulers in these states were Muslims. But the people of these states were against acceding to Pakistan and hence they became part of India.

The boundaries of a country are not drawn everyday to pacify one agitating group here or there. Pakistan could survive as a nation and as an idea even after losing Bangladesh because it was created on the basis of a divisive ideology. On the other hand, India can survive as a nation but not as an idea if it allows another partition on the basis of religion. India is more than a country; it is an idea that must be defended and protected at all costs.

(The writer is a former Union minister)

India became Home for Persecuted Syeds

India: The Haven for Persecuted Syeds

Arif Mohammed Khan

The annals of Indian history are full of accounts of the invaders and adventurers who attracted by the riches of the land came and established their dominations. Some of them made India their home while others departed with all they could lay their hands on.
But there was another class of people whom India attracted in no small measure and they were the oppressed and persecuted of almost every religion and region. Change of political fortunes often led to life becoming impossible for those who resisted conforming to the beliefs of new establishment and hence they were left with no option but to seek refuge in some other land.

India with its age old tradition of religious pluralism and social diversity became the destination of all such people who fled from religious and political persecution. What made Indian pluralism durable was the fact that it was rooted in the religious ethos of unity of human soul (ATMA) and acknowledgement of the right of each individual to approach the Supreme soul (PARMATMA) in a manner suitable to his or her own genius and disposition. Further it highlighted the essential unity of Truth and its diverse expressions by those who know it.

Swami Vivekananda expressed it in most precise terms “… I am proud to belong to a religion which has taught the world both tolerance and universal acceptance. We believe not only in universal toleration, but we accept all religions as true. I am proud to belong to a nation which has sheltered the persecuted and the refugees of all religions and all nations of the earth. I am proud to tell you that we have gathered in our bosom the purest remnant of the Israelites, who came to India and took refuge with us in the very year in which their holy temple was shattered to pieces by Roman tyranny. I am proud to belong to the religion which has sheltered and is still fostering the remnant of the grand Zoroastrian nation.”

But apart from Israelites and Zoroastrians there was another group who headed towards India to save their lives and honor. These were the descendants of Prophet Mohammed known as Banu Fatima and their supporters, who were subjected to severe persecution after the tragic episode of Kerbala in AD 680. Arab chronicles like Tabari give graphic details of poison, murder and verbal insults heaped upon the members of the household of Prophet (AHLE BAYT) by the new rulers of the state founded by him.

Maulana Shibli Naumani in “Siratun Nabi” says: The Umayyads, for about 90 years throughout their vast dominion from Indus to Spain insulted the descendants of Fatima and got Ali openly cursed in sermons at the Mosques.” According to Justice Amir Ali “the same fierce jealousy with which the Umayyads had pursued or persecuted the Banu Fatima, characterized the conduct of the Abbasid rulers towards the descendants of Mohammed.”

This persecution of Banu Fatima continued for more than 300 years and in order to save their lives they fled to Iran and Central Asia and finally most of them landed in India and made it their home. Only recently a mausoleum of Imam Mashhad Ali Wali son of Ninth Imam Al-Taqi has been discovered at Samana near Patiala in Punjab and the historical evidence shows that he came to India to escape persecution by Abbasi Caliph Musta’asim.

No wonder today there are very few families in Arabian Peninsula who claim descent from Lady Fatima but in India there is hardly a town without a Syed family.

Arif Mohammed Khan is a former Minister of Government of India