ULEMA POLITICS IN INDIA– Detrimental to democracy and secularism

ULEMA POLITICS IN INDIA– Detrimental to Democracy and Secularism

By R. Upadhyay

The term Ulema (Plural of Ulama) denotes scholars of Islamic theology. Also known as Maulana, Mullah, Maulawi etc. they claim to be as custodians of Islam and guide the Muslim masses in all matters for latter’s worldly life. They plead that “Islam is the complete way of life”. For them politics is an important ingredient of Islam in establishment of Islamic polity all over the world under the temporal command of Caliphate. Their concept of Islamic power revolves around Arab nationalism. Thus, Arabisation of Muslim masses is another agenda in the charter of duties of Ulema. Despite the division of Arab world in number of geo-political territories, Ulema are under the impression that once the institution of Caliphate is restored all the countries of Muslim world would come under one Islamic command.

Historically, “the advent of Islam constituted the first great rift in the incorporation of the aboriginal peoples in Aryan society”. R.C.Mazumdar – The History and Culture of Indian People, page 478, Bhartiya Vidya Bhavan, 1966). The Islamic priestly class never thought of any reform in Islam although their counterparts in other religions in the world lost their socio-political and economic hegemony over the masses following reform movements. As they are not ready to understand the dynamics of democracy and secularism, integration of Indian Muslims with the national mainstream is not within their agenda.

Carrying forward the legacy of Deoband movement, the successive Ulema rose on their toes whenever they apprehended any imaginary danger to Islam. Their participation in 1857 sepoy revolt and Urdu movement launched by leaders of Aligarh Movement against replacement of Persian with Hindi in the court language of Bihar and Uttar Pradesh also suggest that the Islamic priestly class always played significant role in politics. With their first formal organisation known as Jami'at-ul-Ulama-I-Hind (JUH) which was founded at Lucknow in March 1919 with an objective "to guide the followers of Islam in political and non-political matters from religious point of view", they had launched an aggressive movement for preservation of the Islamic temporal status of the Caliphate held by Ottoman Sultan of Turkey. Their main thrust was against the "religious animosity towards Islam in uprooting the Caliph of Muslims (Ulama in Politics by Istiaq Hussain Qureshi - 1972, page 268)" by the British. In fact Ulema and the feudal section in Islamic community always remained extra alert to ensure their perpetual hold over the Muslim masses and used them as their unpaid warriors for self-seeking socio-political interest. Throughout the Muslim rule except for a brief period of Mogul emperor Akbar, Ulema played a prime role in administration.

Although, the Islamic priestly class failed to save the Caliphate, their active participation in politics and obsession with a 'Shariatised' state within Indian State made their separatist movement a permanent source for widening divide between Hindus and Muslims. "In fact the whole programme of JUH had to revolve around a single pivot that is the shariat, which was unchangeable" (Deoband School and Demand for Pakistan by Ziya-ul-Hasan Farngi -1963, page67). They extended their cooperation to the Indian National Congress and supported the freedom struggle but on their own term and condition. Had they aggressively countered the Muslim League, the latter would not have succeeded in dividing the sub-continent.

Although, Quran is the sole guide for Ulema, they compromised with the then Congress leaders as a tactical move for Islamisation of the whole sub-continent. However, most of the founder members of JUH like Maulana Mahmud Hasan, Maulavi Kifayatullah, Maulana Abul Muslim Mohammad Sajjad , Madani and others always fought for the Muslims as a political community and expected it to be headed by its appointee Amiri-i-Hind as the deputy of Caliph even in independent India.. Amir-i-Hind was to deal with the leaders of non-Muslims in India as equal partner of a Muslim imperium in India. "For Madani all non-Muslims are the enemies of Islam and Muslims" ( Muslim Nationhood in India - Safia Amir, 2000, page 179). Maulavi Kifayatullah of Madrasa-i-Aminia in Delhi, had strongly supported the theory that for Ulema politics cannot be separated from religion. Maulana Abul Muslim Mohammad Sajjad "suggested to Abul Bari that the Ulama should take the reins of politics in their own hands and cross their voices with those in authority in order to establish their religious supremacy and fulfill their higher aim of protecting Islam from western imperialism"( Nationalism and Common Politics in India by Mushirul Hasan, page160).

Despite the open offer to the Indian Muslims for voluntary migration to Pakistan for which they had fought, a sizeable chunk of them stayed back in India knowingly well that it would be a democratic country with equal opportunity to all the citizens. Unfortunately, even after getting equal treatment, the Muslim leaders and Ulema have been nursing a feeling that the community has failed to get its due from the successive governments at the centre and in states. They are under the impression that all the political parties since independence used the community for their electoral benefits but did not redress their grievances. One fails to understand that that Maulana Azad who preferred to share power in Nehru led Congress Government failed to secularise the Muslim masses and guiding them for their integration with the secular mainstream of the nation. He remained silent over the rapid growth of madrasas which are the factories for producing Ulema. Till 1946 there were only 187 madrasas in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar but after partition, when a large number of Muslims from these two states opted for Pakistan, the number of madrasas instead of going down, increased to 356 by 1968 (Islam in Secular India by Mushir-ul-Haq, 1972, page26). By now the number might have increased much more. Even today the percentage of Muslim students in government schools is negligible. Education of larger majority of Muslim masses in Madrasa is the main reason for the economic backwardness of the community. No society could progress with the changing world with such an indifferent attitude of its leaders towards modern education. Indian Muslims need a reformer, who could secularise their community for their co-existence in a secular and democratic polity.

Ever since the genie of Islamist terrorism were out of bottle and initially used under the patronage of USA against Soviet intervention in Afghanistan in late seventies of the last century, their success also prompted the Islamist priestly class in India playing aggressive politics. In famous Shahbano case in mid eighties they forced the then Congress Government led by Rajiv Gandhi to neutralize the Supreme Court verdict. Ironically, the political parties in India are so much scared of Ulema power that they do not dare even to respond to the reminder of Supreme Court for enactment of Uniform Civil Code in conformity with Article 44 of the Constitution. Even the saner words of scholars and writers hardly stir the conscience of the ruling party. "None can deny the fact that the Muslim law on marriage and divorce, as in force in India - the Anglo-Muhammadan law - violates the rights enjoyed by women in Islamic law (Shariah) (Muslims in India by A.G.Noorani, 2003, page 16). Resolutions of Mili parliament in its meeting held at Aligarh on January 15, 1996"that secular democracy is a constitutional fraud, while secularism and democracy are both un-Islamic and 'Haram'" never bothered the political parties in power. It was all due to the power politics of Ulema.

Some developments in recent years like various Ulema bodies demanding reservation for Muslims in legislative bodies, government jobs and higher educations remind the Indian people of the similar demands raised by All India Muslim League after its formation in December 1906. It appears that success of a Muslim outfit, Assam United Democratic Front (AUDF), which was formed on the eve of 2006 assembly election to protect the interests of illegal Muslim immigrants from Bangladesh, some of the Ulema also formulated a strategy to replicate this experiment in other parts of the country. A Shia cleric Maulana Kalwe Jawaad in an interview with rediff.com correspondent Sharad Praddhan in Lucknow in May 2006 spoke that Muslims had been ignored since independence and suggested that without the participation of Ulema in politics the plight of the community would continue. Maulana Syed Ahmad Bukhari of Jama Masjid Delhi announced the formation of Uttar Pradesh United Democratic Front (UPUDF) same year in the month of June. Similarly, All India Ulema Council and Mumbai Aman Committee jointly organized Maharashtra Muslim convention at Anjuman-e-Islam in Mumbai same month (in June 2006) and adopted a resolution demanding reservation for Muslims in parliament, state assemblies and councils, local bodies, private institutions and government jobs on the basis of population. Maulana Zahiruddin Khan, President of All India Ulema Council appealed to the Muslims to put pressure on political parties for their representation as they have not been given any share since independence. These developments almost 100 years after the formation of All India Muslim League in December 1906 suggest that the Muslim clergies have revived the same politics which divided the Indian sub-continent.

Although, except in Assam the efforts of Ulema failed to create any visible electoral impact in elections during last two years, the events are the reminder of the frustration of Ulema after the sliding decline of Islamic rule in first half of nineteenth century. It may not be out of place to mention that at initial stage Muslim League too had failed to cut much ice but within four decades of its formation it created a sufficient strength in dividing the sub-continent and creating Pakistan. Revival of same communal politics by the restless Islamic clerics who get the support of all the political parties particularly the communists and ‘secularists’ for their vote bank politics is apparently a signal for the future of Ulema politics in the country. Their strategy to target the assembly and parliament constituencies having more than twenty percent of Muslim voters and to consolidate the Islamic vote bank for replicating the Assam phenomenon is not only detrimental to national interest but also a danger to communal harmony and national integrity.

Recent propaganda of Ulema that “Islam is a religion of peace” has hardly created any impact in changing the heart of the Islamist terrorists. Their message to the common Indians that the Islamic priestly class is against terrorism is nothing but a tactical move of radical Islamists to defend Islam from its tarnished image by the terrorists. The terror violence perpetrated by Islamist warriors for restoration of the institution of Caliphate has affected the image of Islam in general and radical extremist ideology of Deoband in particular. Therefore, with a view to defend their faith as well as Deobandi ideology they have been mobilizing their community members without criticizing the exporters of terrorism who are mostly financed by the oil rich Arab world. Without any aggressive assault on terrorist outfits, their movement for communal consolidation is not for any fight against terrorism but to exhibit their strength to the political parties for bargain in future elections. A peep into the deliberations in their various impressive gatherings, it is found that they were more concerned about the actions of the government against Muslim activists arrested in terror actions related cases than advising their community members to unearth the sleeper cells in their ghettos. They have hardly asked the Muslim masses to co-operate with the security agencies in containing terrorism.

Mass mobilisation of Muslims by organizing anti-terrorism conference without speaking a word against organizations like Al Qaida, Lashkar-e-Toyba, Jais-e-Mohammad and SIMI is a part of Ulema politics for uniting the community against the arrest of Muslim suspects in terror attack cases on the plea that government was causing harassment to innocent Muslims and defaming Islam by linking the terror blasts with their faith. Increasing activities of Islamist terrorists in different parts of India and aggressive mobilization of Muslims on issues like Danish Cartoons, Iranian Nukes, America’s attack on Iraq, Taslima and other Islamic issues are clear indication of the communal march of Ulema.

Practicing a brand of Muslim appeasement politics for years by Congress at national level, Rashtriya Janata Dal of Lalu Prasad Yadav in Bihar, Samajwadi Party of Mulayam Singh Yadav in Uttar Pradesh and communists in West Bengal have only encouraged the Ulema in accelerating movement of their protracted communal politics. Instead of making efforts to neutralize this danger the ‘secular’ political parties and government are busy in competitive minoritism even at the cost of national interest. Sachchar committee report and Muslim first policy are the ready made examples. With its policy of appeasement to Ulema, the UPA Government under the pressure of Left-Front Government of West Bengal forced out Taslima Nasrin, a Bangladeshi writer to leave the country though the issue had no socio-economic and political relevance. Instead of taking firm action against the activists of All Indian Minority Forum which caused violence in Kolkata in November 2007 which ultimately led to ouster of Nasreen, the West Bengal Government forced the UPA Government at centre to take her out from West Bengal. Tragically, even a large number of non-practicing but enlightened Muslim leaders are found to be silent still

(The author can be reached at e-mail ramashray60@rediffmail.com)