Mr Yoginder Sikand is a renowned scholar, an expert on the issue of Indian Muslims, communal conflict, madrasa education, madrasa reforms, concept of jihad and extremism among Muslims etc etc. He has written a number of books and he an oft quoted author on the issues of Indian Muslims. He use to maintain a number of blogs on these topics. Of late, Mr Sikand has removed all his blogs and stopped all his activism on these issues. The present article was written when he was particularly active in 'sermonising' Muslims. He had raised a number issues which he found objectionable in the beliefs and practise of Muslims. I had written this piece at that time, as a response to one of his article in a blog (madrasareforms), which is now removed.
Firstly, about his criticism of, compulsory use of Arabic language in Muslim Prayers. He said this as a rigid, narrow and chauvinistic imposition of Arab nationalism on Non-Arabs and a remnant of Arab imperial past. He said, God can be invoked in any language, why only stick to a particular language? His argument sounds good, but his understanding of the issue is very restricted and narrow.
According to Muslims, in every thing they do they have to follow the footsteps and the teachings of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, as according to Holy Qur'an, he is a best model to emulate.
Muslims pray as Prophet Muhammad taught and commanded them to pray. He didn't say pray as you wish and in whatever form you like? There is a method and way of doing prayers in every belief system. Specially the ritual and ceremonial prayers are done in a particular and specific way. And their is no chauvinism in this. In Islam, calling Almighty in whatever language and in whatever condition and manner is allowed and infact appreciated, but in ritual and ceremonial prayers you need to copy the prayer of Prophet Muhammad, who has been particularly taught how to pray by Almighty Himself through revelation. Doing this is not a rigid, narrow and chauvinistic imposition of Arab nationalism.
For example, we all love India and sing patriotic songs or express our patriotism in many diverse forms, languages and ways. But when the ceremonial flag hoisting takes place, we all sing National anthem only, that too in Bengali language. No one complains that, this is a rigid, narrow and chauvinistic imposition of Bengali linguistic nationalism (or regionalism) in the garb of National Anthem. In the same way for a Muslim during ceremonial prayers, Arabic, the language of Qur'an is compulsory for recitation, and rest of the time he can sing His praises, call upon Him in whatever language he feels comfortable, yes, in Bengali too!
Secondly, he is right in emphasising that, being Muslim is not a mere census exercise, but something to do with actions and characters. Anybody who follows truly the teachings of Qur'an, in letter and spirit is a Muslim; even though the census registers may be saying something else.Then he goes on the say that, he has found in Qur'an the teaching that, if you are good and do good, your religion is immaterial. Saying that he has found in the Qur'an the teaching that, he can follow any religion, lead any way of life as long as he thinks that he is doing good, is a gross misunderstanding of Qur'an. If someone has drawn this conclusion, we doubt whether he has read Qur'an with proper understanding and classical and mainstream explanations.
To explain this issue more clearly, lets take this example. A vast number of mankind believes that, calling a particular Prophet as begotten son of God is good. Qur'an says that this is bad, infact a blasphemy. According to Qur'an, saying that God did not beget nor is He begotten is good and true. Now two diametrically opposite views are equally good for their adherents. According to the skewed (above mentioned) perception of Islam, both are Muslims! because both think that they are doing good, as doing and being good is what Islam is about.
Yes Islam is all about being good and doing good. But what is that good has to be defined by the teachings of Qur'an and the Prophetic tradition, not by one's whims and fancies.
Thirdly, he repeatedly accused Islam as being a supremacist communal ideology, and he concluded that, this thinking of Muslims is the root cause for their predicament. If this is the root cause for our predicament, curing this malady acquires utmost importance for us. Explaining his stand further he writes, saying one's religion as the only true one and that one can enter into paradise or heaven only by following their religion is supremacist, intolerant and hence condemnable.
But before going further into the discussion, I would first like to clear the definition of what is Religion and what is Paradise?
Religion is a concept, an entity, an ideology, which infiltrates the mental and body faculties of a person, so much so that he orients his life and its activities—consciously or sub-consciously—for the realisation of those things.
Sometimes he may not be carrying out ostentatious (showy) ceremonies to that effect, but he is in reality following the religion, what his heart believes and around which his life rotates. For some desire of lust is their ‘deity’ (god), and seeking means and ways to satisfy his inner desire is his religion. Similarly for others their race or their culture or their nation or their community or their ideology is their ‘deity’. And the way in which they submit to their deity of desire is their religion.
Paradise of man is a place, time or opportunity (real or imaginary) when his desires, dreams and aspirations seem to get fulfilled.
For some wealth is their deity, and their actions, ways in seeking it or ceremonies in displaying it, is their religion. And a place, time or opportunity (real or imaginary) in which they can satisfy their ‘god of desire’ is infact their paradise. For others a dream of triumph of their nationalistic aspirations is the real paradise. Similarly is the case with racial, cultural or ideological beliefs irrespective of whether those are right or wrong.
When a person consciously and freely chooses a religion, worships a deity and yearns for a paradise, he thinks and believes that, he is on the right path and this is the only way by which one can get his 'paradise of dreams'. Is this supremacist? I am really surprised, why so called scholars fail to realise this simple fact of life.
A true Muslim believes that worshipping the One Almighty God and doing activities and rituals to earn His pleasure by following His approved path shown by Him to His appointed Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is the only way to enter the Paradise of his definition. Similarly a true materialist and hedonist believe that worshipping one’s desires of lust and accumulating material pleasures, by following the path shown by various role models in this field, is the only right way to lead this life. And fulfilling of this desire or a dream of fulfilment is his paradise !.
A true hedonist believes that, true Muslims, who do not believe in his belief, are actually fools, who are living in a hell (by curbing their lusts), in a false belief of an unseen and unknown paradise !! Who are supremacists then? True Muslims or True Hedonists?
Answer is; all true believers in their respective ideologies are right in their assertion and profession according to their beliefs. If they fail to do so, they are not true believers in their professed faith or they are hypocrites, as their real religion in their heart is something different and their claims on their tongues is different.
The real misunderstanding occurs when those who don't really believe in the Paradise of Muslims and the prerequisite conditions for entering it, object to the assertion of Muslims that only Muslims will enter the Real Paradise. Why should anybody objects to something which they don't believe in?
For example, if a person believes that what ever good things we receive in this world is the real paradise and whatever bad things we get in this world is the real hell and there is no other life after this life and no other paradise or hell other than this, and all those poor and suffering persons (especially muslims) are actually in the hell, facing the punishment of their crimes. If a person believes in all these, we Muslims don't feel and shouldn't feel offended. Because he is right according to his belief (although a wrong one) and we are right according to our belief. He is staying in his paradise, we will live in our paradise, God willing.
This is neither supremacist nor insult to the practitioners of various faiths. Let them believe with evidence , with an open conscience and propagate it with conviction. And similarly allow the practitioners of Islam to uphold their beliefs and propagate it. Let the people decide and judge which religion or belief to accept and what to reject.
