01-18-2006, 06:39 AM
Maulana X is a leading scholar associated with the
Ahl-i Hadith Muslim community in India. In this
interview with Yoginder Sikand he talks
about sectarianism and communalism and bitterly
critiques the Lashkar-i Tayyeba, a Pakistan-based
terrorist outfit associated with the Ahl-i Hadith
school of thought.
Maulana Xâs name has been withheld as after the
interview was held and the transcript shown to him he
suggested the deletion of key parts of this interview,
for reasons he did not disclose. Since these crucial
portions of the interview are of particular interest
the interviewer decided to preserve these sections
while not naming the interviewee.
Q: The Ahl-i Hadith are known to be strict puritans.
In Ahl-i Hadith literature religions other than Islam
and their adherents are generally painted in a very
negative light. Often, non-Muslims as well as Muslims
other than those associated with the Ahl-i Hadith are
portrayed as âenemiesâ and as, by definition, opposed
to Islam.
What do you feel about this?
A: Yes, it is true that some Ahl-I Hadith
writers do present other religions and Muslim sects
and their followers
in this way, but to generalise about any community
like this is
wrong. The Qurâan does not allow for these sorts of
sweeping
comments. I am personally opposed to this but we
cannot control what individual Ahl-i Hadith
scholars write. As I see it, Islam enjoins upon
Muslims to cultivate good relations with others.
Q: What sort of work, if any, has the Ahl-i
Hadith been engaged in to promote dialogue between
Hindus and Muslims?
A: To be honest, we have not given as much attention
to this as we should have. We have so many problems
within the Muslim community itself to address. I do
agree we need
to be far more active in promoting inter-community
dialogue than we have so far.
Q: What do you feel about the Lashkar-i Tayyeba, a
Pakistan-based terrorist outfit active in the ongoing
war in Kashmir and which is associated with the Ahl-I
Hadith school of thought?<b>
A: Many Indian Ahl-i Hadith leaders are opposed to all
forms of terrorism, and the Lashkar is engaged in
terrorism and so I am opposed to it as well. The
Lashkar
claims to be associated with the Ahl-i Hadith school
of thought but most of the people involved in it are
ignorant (jahil), crazy (sarfira) and stupid (ahmak)
youth. There are very few noted âulama associated with
it. </b>The fact of the matter is that those who run the
Lashkar are people whose claims of being leaders of
the Muslims were not seriously accepted by others so
they set up their own group. And they did not stop at
this. They even fiercely opposed respectable Ahl-i
Hadith âulama in Pakistan itself and are giving the
Ahl-I Hadith a very bad name. They are spreading
hatred against non-Muslims and also exhort Muslims to
hate others. <b>They
talk of establishing an âIslamic stateâ but when they
donât observe the rules of Islamic morality and donât
have true Islam in their hearts what is the use of
talking about an âIslamic stateâ? People like them
claim that they want to establish âGodâs ruleâ
(hukumat-i ilahiya) in India when they cannot even
establish Islam in their own families! </b>They are simply
defaming Islam by empty slogans of flying the Islamic
flag atop the Red Fort in Delhi! By politicising Islam
and dragging it in the streets like a commodity they
are spreading oppression.
Islam clearly states that peace is preferable to war,
and war must be launched only in self-defence. The
injustice of one community cannot justify a similarly
unjust response. But the Lashkar has killed numerous
innocent people, which is totally
un-Islamic. I will go so far as to say that the
Lashkar has nothing to do with Islam. They are simply
puppets in the hands of the Americans and the Pakistan
government.
Q: Groups like the Lashkar give added ammunition to
Hindutva forces in India. Would you
agree that Muslim and Hindu communalism feed on each
other?
A: Certainly they do. We in India must forcefully
rebut claims by groups such as the Lashkar, who
purport to speak on behalf of the Indian Muslims. We
should cherish and support Indian secularism and
democracy, rather than railing against it as
âun-Islamicâ. We should appreciate the fact that in
India, unlike Pakistan, we can still pray in our
mosques without being attacked by armed militants.
Q: So, if the Indian Ahl-i Hadith is opposed to groups
like the Lashkar, how is it that one hardly comes
across any statements in the press by Indian Ahl-i
Hadith condemning such groups?
A: Muslim leaders regularly issue such statements, but
the English
and Hindi press do not publish them. They take little
or no interest in Muslim issues. The only time they
write about us is when something negative or
controversial happens, such as when some maulvi issues
a controversial fatwa, and they make a big mountain of
a mole hill out of that.
Q: How do you envisage a just and sustainable
settlement of the Kashmir conflict?
A: When the Indian Constitution was framed, Kashmir
was provided with considerable autonomy through
Article 370, which needs to be revived and preserved.
I know for a fact that, contrary to the general
impression, not
many Kashmiris actually want to join Pakistan. See how
the Mohajirs are treated in Pakistan. It is likely
that the Kashmiris will meet the same fate. So, the
solution to the issue should be within the framework
of the Indian Constitution. The Government of India
should dialogue with the genuine representatives of
the Kashmiris.
Q: Your statement suggests that a section of the
Indian Ahl-i
Hadith has a different approach from that of its
counterpart in Pakistan.
A: The Ahl-i Hadith in both countries share a common
understanding as regards Islamic belief (âaqida) but
our politics are different. As many Indian Ahl-i
Hadith scholars
see it, in matters of faith we are Muslims first and
Muslims last, but when it comes to patriotism we are
Indians first and Indians last. Many Indian Ahl-i
Hadith scholars, most notably Abul Kalam Azad, were
staunch Indian patriots and opposed the Partition and
we should carry on in their path.
Q: Of late the Ahl-i Hadith and the Deobandis in India
and Pakistan have been at loggerheads, hurling charges
against each other, some of these bordering on
declaring the other as virtual apostates or infidels.
How do you look at this?
A: I think this is very unfortunate. The different
Muslim maslaks (schools of thought) must learn to
co-exist comfortably. We cannot destroy other maslaks
or religions, and we need to respect a personâs choice
of following a particular maslak or religion even if
we donât follow it ourselves. If you are sincere, you
should be soft towards others so that they appreciate
your good qualities and the good things in your maslak
or religion. The Qurâan tells us that when we talk to
others, it should be with kindness and wisdom. Hence,
I do admit that the tendency among some Ahl-I Hadith
scholars and âulama of condemning others, using shrill
rhetoric, is wrong. We cannot control what individual
Ahl-i Hadith maulvis do or say in their own capacity,
although we do tell our people that we should not
respond in this way. Yes, we need to logically defend
our particular beliefs if they are challenged, but we
should not descend, as some of us have, to the level
of abusing others.
Frankly, I think these seemingly never-ending heated
debates and mutual denunciations between the different
Muslim maslaks is sickening, the more so since there
are other crucial issues to be spending our time and
resources on, such as tackling poverty or communalism.
Often, behind these inter-maslak disputes is the quest
for personal gain and name. It is also true that
countering other maslaks is something that is
ingrained in the madrasa system today<b>. It is not, as
is sometimes alleged, that those who talk of madrasa
reforms are all motivated by anti-Islamic sentiments.</b>
They rightly see many madrasas as promoting this
narrow sort of thinking. This calls for the âulama of
the different maslaks to change their attitude and
promote tolerance, for other maslaks as well as for
other religions. Instead of relating to others in a
conflictual mode, we should do so with genuine respect
in a joint search for the truth through dialogue,
rather than, as at present, motivated by a desire to
condemn and defeat others. This is not what a genuine
search for truth is all about. That is just a means to
make oneself feel superior to others and leads to
conflict. We really need to listen others more
seriously, out of concern and respect. After all, God
has created all of us and he is the Sustainer of
everyone and surely He wants us to respect all of His
creation.
Ahl-i Hadith Muslim community in India. In this
interview with Yoginder Sikand he talks
about sectarianism and communalism and bitterly
critiques the Lashkar-i Tayyeba, a Pakistan-based
terrorist outfit associated with the Ahl-i Hadith
school of thought.
Maulana Xâs name has been withheld as after the
interview was held and the transcript shown to him he
suggested the deletion of key parts of this interview,
for reasons he did not disclose. Since these crucial
portions of the interview are of particular interest
the interviewer decided to preserve these sections
while not naming the interviewee.
Q: The Ahl-i Hadith are known to be strict puritans.
In Ahl-i Hadith literature religions other than Islam
and their adherents are generally painted in a very
negative light. Often, non-Muslims as well as Muslims
other than those associated with the Ahl-i Hadith are
portrayed as âenemiesâ and as, by definition, opposed
to Islam.
What do you feel about this?
A: Yes, it is true that some Ahl-I Hadith
writers do present other religions and Muslim sects
and their followers
in this way, but to generalise about any community
like this is
wrong. The Qurâan does not allow for these sorts of
sweeping
comments. I am personally opposed to this but we
cannot control what individual Ahl-i Hadith
scholars write. As I see it, Islam enjoins upon
Muslims to cultivate good relations with others.
Q: What sort of work, if any, has the Ahl-i
Hadith been engaged in to promote dialogue between
Hindus and Muslims?
A: To be honest, we have not given as much attention
to this as we should have. We have so many problems
within the Muslim community itself to address. I do
agree we need
to be far more active in promoting inter-community
dialogue than we have so far.
Q: What do you feel about the Lashkar-i Tayyeba, a
Pakistan-based terrorist outfit active in the ongoing
war in Kashmir and which is associated with the Ahl-I
Hadith school of thought?<b>
A: Many Indian Ahl-i Hadith leaders are opposed to all
forms of terrorism, and the Lashkar is engaged in
terrorism and so I am opposed to it as well. The
Lashkar
claims to be associated with the Ahl-i Hadith school
of thought but most of the people involved in it are
ignorant (jahil), crazy (sarfira) and stupid (ahmak)
youth. There are very few noted âulama associated with
it. </b>The fact of the matter is that those who run the
Lashkar are people whose claims of being leaders of
the Muslims were not seriously accepted by others so
they set up their own group. And they did not stop at
this. They even fiercely opposed respectable Ahl-i
Hadith âulama in Pakistan itself and are giving the
Ahl-I Hadith a very bad name. They are spreading
hatred against non-Muslims and also exhort Muslims to
hate others. <b>They
talk of establishing an âIslamic stateâ but when they
donât observe the rules of Islamic morality and donât
have true Islam in their hearts what is the use of
talking about an âIslamic stateâ? People like them
claim that they want to establish âGodâs ruleâ
(hukumat-i ilahiya) in India when they cannot even
establish Islam in their own families! </b>They are simply
defaming Islam by empty slogans of flying the Islamic
flag atop the Red Fort in Delhi! By politicising Islam
and dragging it in the streets like a commodity they
are spreading oppression.
Islam clearly states that peace is preferable to war,
and war must be launched only in self-defence. The
injustice of one community cannot justify a similarly
unjust response. But the Lashkar has killed numerous
innocent people, which is totally
un-Islamic. I will go so far as to say that the
Lashkar has nothing to do with Islam. They are simply
puppets in the hands of the Americans and the Pakistan
government.
Q: Groups like the Lashkar give added ammunition to
Hindutva forces in India. Would you
agree that Muslim and Hindu communalism feed on each
other?
A: Certainly they do. We in India must forcefully
rebut claims by groups such as the Lashkar, who
purport to speak on behalf of the Indian Muslims. We
should cherish and support Indian secularism and
democracy, rather than railing against it as
âun-Islamicâ. We should appreciate the fact that in
India, unlike Pakistan, we can still pray in our
mosques without being attacked by armed militants.
Q: So, if the Indian Ahl-i Hadith is opposed to groups
like the Lashkar, how is it that one hardly comes
across any statements in the press by Indian Ahl-i
Hadith condemning such groups?
A: Muslim leaders regularly issue such statements, but
the English
and Hindi press do not publish them. They take little
or no interest in Muslim issues. The only time they
write about us is when something negative or
controversial happens, such as when some maulvi issues
a controversial fatwa, and they make a big mountain of
a mole hill out of that.
Q: How do you envisage a just and sustainable
settlement of the Kashmir conflict?
A: When the Indian Constitution was framed, Kashmir
was provided with considerable autonomy through
Article 370, which needs to be revived and preserved.
I know for a fact that, contrary to the general
impression, not
many Kashmiris actually want to join Pakistan. See how
the Mohajirs are treated in Pakistan. It is likely
that the Kashmiris will meet the same fate. So, the
solution to the issue should be within the framework
of the Indian Constitution. The Government of India
should dialogue with the genuine representatives of
the Kashmiris.
Q: Your statement suggests that a section of the
Indian Ahl-i
Hadith has a different approach from that of its
counterpart in Pakistan.
A: The Ahl-i Hadith in both countries share a common
understanding as regards Islamic belief (âaqida) but
our politics are different. As many Indian Ahl-i
Hadith scholars
see it, in matters of faith we are Muslims first and
Muslims last, but when it comes to patriotism we are
Indians first and Indians last. Many Indian Ahl-i
Hadith scholars, most notably Abul Kalam Azad, were
staunch Indian patriots and opposed the Partition and
we should carry on in their path.
Q: Of late the Ahl-i Hadith and the Deobandis in India
and Pakistan have been at loggerheads, hurling charges
against each other, some of these bordering on
declaring the other as virtual apostates or infidels.
How do you look at this?
A: I think this is very unfortunate. The different
Muslim maslaks (schools of thought) must learn to
co-exist comfortably. We cannot destroy other maslaks
or religions, and we need to respect a personâs choice
of following a particular maslak or religion even if
we donât follow it ourselves. If you are sincere, you
should be soft towards others so that they appreciate
your good qualities and the good things in your maslak
or religion. The Qurâan tells us that when we talk to
others, it should be with kindness and wisdom. Hence,
I do admit that the tendency among some Ahl-I Hadith
scholars and âulama of condemning others, using shrill
rhetoric, is wrong. We cannot control what individual
Ahl-i Hadith maulvis do or say in their own capacity,
although we do tell our people that we should not
respond in this way. Yes, we need to logically defend
our particular beliefs if they are challenged, but we
should not descend, as some of us have, to the level
of abusing others.
Frankly, I think these seemingly never-ending heated
debates and mutual denunciations between the different
Muslim maslaks is sickening, the more so since there
are other crucial issues to be spending our time and
resources on, such as tackling poverty or communalism.
Often, behind these inter-maslak disputes is the quest
for personal gain and name. It is also true that
countering other maslaks is something that is
ingrained in the madrasa system today<b>. It is not, as
is sometimes alleged, that those who talk of madrasa
reforms are all motivated by anti-Islamic sentiments.</b>
They rightly see many madrasas as promoting this
narrow sort of thinking. This calls for the âulama of
the different maslaks to change their attitude and
promote tolerance, for other maslaks as well as for
other religions. Instead of relating to others in a
conflictual mode, we should do so with genuine respect
in a joint search for the truth through dialogue,
rather than, as at present, motivated by a desire to
condemn and defeat others. This is not what a genuine
search for truth is all about. That is just a means to
make oneself feel superior to others and leads to
conflict. We really need to listen others more
seriously, out of concern and respect. After all, God
has created all of us and he is the Sustainer of
everyone and surely He wants us to respect all of His
creation.