It is interesting yet pathetic to see a faction fight in Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind (that controls the largest network of Deoband madrasas) assume the stature of an ugly controversy over a non-issue. The latest round in the struggle for leadership of the Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind between the uncle (Arshad Madani) and the nephew (Mahmood Madani) has been won by the nephew. The uncle must now presumably think of a fresh strategy to rebound back in the limelight. If the nephew could get the home minister to participate in its national conference, may be the uncle should try for the Prime Minister himself.
Between the two of them, this uncle-nephew duo has been responsible for thrusting completely irrelevant issues on the Muslim community. The latest in this series being the controversy surrounding Vande Mataram which has again ended up putting the Muslims on the defensive. Why should Muslims be put in such a situation where they have to proclaim that they love this country as much as anyone else, and that too because of the internal wrangling of one Muslim family? The real tragedy is that the Muslims themselves do not seem to realize this. And, of course, there is the ever-willing media, particularly the electronic part, which lapped up one resolution out of the many passed at the recent controversial national and blew it completely out of proportion. The nephew indeed must be a happy man; for he seems to have achieved what he wanted.
Amidst all this, nobody seems to have a clue about what other resolutions were passed in that national meeting of Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind. There were as many as 21 odd resolutions passed that day and some, like that opposing the formation of a central madrasa board and separate educational provisions for Muslims girls after just 10 years of age, merited far serious debate, but there was not even a hint of discussion on these issues. One can only hope that there would be wider debate on the other resolutions of the Jamiat but that’s another story. In the meantime, let us return to the controversy over Vande Mataram.
"There is no compulsion in religion". This is a statement which the Jamiat Ulema repeats ad nauseam whenever it wants to portray the liberal face of Islam. Why is it then that it is forcing its own co-religionists to follow their version of Islam as the only authentic truth? The controversy over Vande Mataram is another example of the illiberal streak within organizations like Jamiat and its ideological fountainhead, the Deoband. To justify their stance would be to endorse the whole gamut of conservative agenda that they together stand for.
Two arguments have been made in defence of the Jamiat's latest. The first is that a fatwa is just an opinion and not a ruling. It is true that a fatwa is just an opinion and not an edict, as has been made out in the popular press. Muslims are completely free to either obey the fatwa or discard it in the dustbin. However, this does not absolve the Jamiat from their irresponsibility. It should be understood that the Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind is one of the largest religious organization of Indian Muslims. Organizationally supported by a huge network of Deobandi madrasas, the voice of Jamiat matters to ordinary Muslims who look up to their Ulama for the correct interpretation of scriptures.
Few years ago, I met a person who had pulled out his son from school and had put him in a madrasa. When I inquired why he had done so, he said that his son had to recite prayers in the school, which was un-Islamic. This person of course knew nothing of the contents of the prayers but he was firmly of the opinion that if the Ulama said it was un-Islamic then it must be true. People like him make no distinction between an opinion and an edict and therefore the argument that a fatwa is just an opinion does not hold good for a section of the Muslim community who believe that the Ulama are the spokesperson of Islam. The fatwa, lacking in wisdom, will have the effect of ghettoising the Muslims even further.
The second argument, hardly reported in the English media, was that Vande Mataram had been made into a divisive issue by the RSS-VHP in parts of Uttar Pradesh, where they have been taking out morchas to hammer home the point that since Muslims do not sing Vande Mataram, they are traitors. The latest Deoband fatwa was thus, some argue, a response to the tirade of the Hindu Right. That may be so, but what is the point in making a local issue into a national one? Besides, we should remember the chronology of events. Vande Mataram controversy was resolved satisfactorily way back in 1937. It was inexplicably revived in 2006 by the then HRD minister Arjun Singh and it was only then that the BJP was able to once again make it into a political issue as it fitted well with their designs to paint the Muslims as outsiders.
[Incidentally, in 2006, Dar-ul Uloom had behaved with comparative restraint: On September 6, 2006, Maulana Marghoob ur Rahman, director, Dar-ul Uloom, Deoband had clarified that "The Dar-ul Uloom has not issued any fatwa on the singing of the national song, nor appealed to Muslim children to stay away from schools on September 7". A certain section is wanting to attack Dar-ul Uloom on this without any basis, as no fatwa has been issued. On Sepetmber 3, 2006, Dar-ul Uloom had only apparently joined issue with BJP Vice President Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi "for saying that there's nothing wrong with Muslims singing Vande Mataram".]
A search for Vande Mataram on the web site of the Darul Ifta, the fatwa division of the Darul Uloom, Deoband, throws up the following fatwa (385/358=B/1430) dated April 7, 2009, which presumably is what the Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind resolution was ratifying now:
"Is it permisible [sic] to chant "BANDE MATARAM" and also sing "BHARAT O BHAGYA BIDHATA" which are our national anthem and national song?"
Vande Matram has some couplets containing beliefs against Islamic creed i.e. shirk (associating partner to Allah). The Indian land was depicted to be God and to be worshipped, this is against our creed of Tauheed (oneness of Allah). Therefore, Muslim children should avoid hymning it. We are ancient inhabitants of India, we love our country, but we do not worship it, Islam allows worshipping Allah alone, a Muslim worships none other than Allah.
Besides, it should be highlighted once again that (a) the national song is only the first two verses that predate Anandmath, (b) those verses have no references to land to be worshipped as God, (c) there has been no recent demand for Muslims to compulsorily sing this song and (d) no less than the Supreme Court has mandated that even singing the national anthem -- leave alone Vande Mataram, a national song -- can not be compulsory. So one really fails to see the need for raking up the issue needlessly at this juncture. That Darul Itfa was simply responding to a query can be understood, but passing a resolution in Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind's national conference does make one question their intent. Whatever be Mr Arjun Singh's motivations in 2006, this time around it is clear that the Jamiat ended up making a dead, or at best a local, issue into a national one. If their intent was political, which no doubt it was, it was bad politics. For far from providing any relief to the Muslims, their actions have ended up providing a whiff of life to a nearly dead BJP. The resolution tells them that their kind of politics has many takers and even if they are not in a position to work up passions, there are others who are more than willing to do their bidding for them. Hope the Muslims are listening.
