THIS ABOVE ALL
Why fatwas don’t work
Khushwant Singh

On February 25 Muslim clerics gathered at the Dar-ul-Uloom in Deoband (UP) pronounced a fatwa condemning terrorism as un-Islamic. Four days later a Muslim suicide bomber blew himself up, killing 38 other Muslims attending a tribal jirga funeral in the North West Frontier Province of Pakistan. Two days later yet another Muslim suicide bomber blew himself up along with 40 other Muslims attending a post-funeral namaz of a slain notable. On March 4 a series of blasts took another seven Muslim lives in Lahore cantonment. No further evidence is necessary to prove that howsoever pious the intentions of the learned Ulemas assembled at Deoband were, their fatwa fell on deaf ears.

Terrible Tuesday in Lahore: Fatwas condemning terrorist acts don’t have the desired impact. — Photo by Reuters

I am pretty certain that it will not have the slightest impact on incidents of terrorism. We should know a little more about the seminary in Deoband. It was founded in 1866 by a mystic, Muhammed Abid of the Hanafi order. It was, and is, strictly a Sunni madrasa, excluding Shias from its fold. It disapproved of Sir Sayyad Ahmed's Aligarh Muslim University and its attempt to westernise Indian Muslims. Its outlook was, and is, not nationalist but pan-Islamic. Its Pakistani offshoot opened up hundreds of madrasas, providing free shelter, food and Islamic education to orphans and the poor.

They also inculcated a militant spirit among their students. The Taliban is a byproduct of these madrasas. They showed their martial prowess in driving out the Soviet army of occupation from Afghanistan. They then extended their operations to what they conceived as non-Muslim presence in Indian Kashmir and against fellow Muslims in Pakistan who they believed had been corrupted by un-Islamic forces. I have not been to Deoband but have read accounts of it by Indian and foreign journalists.

It is an island of medieval bigotry in a fast-changing world. Teaching Arabic is given priority over teaching sciences. All women are compelled to wear burqas. No man is allowed to talk to a woman who is not veiled from head to foot. There are no cinemas; watching TV is prohibited; photography condemned as un-Islamic. What can you expect from a child brought up in such an atmosphere except that he grows up into a religious fanatic? What is true about Deoband is equally true about Hindu and Sikh seminaries — all of them are hatcheries of religious intolerance. Their fatwas or hukamnamas don't have the slighest impact on the general public. It is only strong public disapproval that will put an end to the menace of religion-based terrorism.

One truth, many expressions

You must often wonder why every religion in the world is splintered into many factions. Christianity has three major branches — Catholics, Protestants and Greek Orthodox — all three are further divided into dozens of sub-divisions. Islam has two major divisions — Sunnis and Shias — both of which have many sub-divisions. Buddhism has its Mahayana, Himayanan, Zen and regional varieties. Hindus are split into innumerable castes and sub-castes. Even religions with smaller followings like Jainism and Sikhism are split. Jains have Digambars, Swetambars and Sthanakvasi. Sikhs are divided into Kesadhari Khalsa and Sahajdhari as well as Nirankaris (two factions) Namdharis and Radha Soamis.

What is baffling is that factionalism exists despite the fact that all religions accept the existence of one God, have one founder-father, messenger or messiah, and one major religious text. Christians believe in one God, Jehovah, one messiah, Jesus Christ, and one book, the Bible. Muslims believe in one Allah, his messenger, Muhammad, and one book, the Koran. Buddhists and Jains avoid questions about the existence of God but recognise Gautam Buddha and Mahavira as founders of their faiths. Hindus believe in the trinity of Brahma, Vishnu and Mahesh. Vedas and Upanishads are their holy books. Sikhs believe in one Waheguru, Nanak, as the founder of their religion, and Granth Sahib as their scripture.

While these factors are shared in common by all major religions, there should be no disputes between them. But there are. Why? I put the problem to my niece-in-law, who goes under the happy name of Happy. She is much into reading religious literature, and what she calls metaphysics. As it happened, she had put the same question to her religious mentor. His reply made good sense to me. He said: "In a class of 20 students, there is only one teacher. He uses only one textbook for teaching. However, when he sets out questions for the annual exam, he gets 20 different answers to the same question". Ekam sad bahuda vadanti. There is only one truth. There are many ways of expressing it.

Deaf wisdom

A friend who was known for his witticism in his younger days is now old and hard of hearing. He often gets spoken words wrong and his replies can be quite amusing. Some years ago I told that Y.S. Ratra of the IAS had been appointed Chief Secretary of Punjab. He asked: "Why is the Chief Secretary going on a rath yatra?"

More recently I told him of the mess created by Buddhadeb Bhattacharya, Chief Minister of West Bengal, of the agitation in Nandigram. "What can you expect of a man who's name is Bhrashtacharya," he remarked.

When told that Angela Markel had been elected President of Germany, he asked: "How can a great country like Germany elect of woman named after a tiny fish mackerel?"

The most hilarious of his aural functions was on hearing that Education Minister Arjan Singh had promised arakshans (reservations) in jobs to 27 per cent OBCs. He asked: "How does Arjan Singh know that only 27 per cent of the OBCs have erection problems?"