From: budaraju@chewi.che.wisc.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian
Subject: Babri Mosque and othe Hindu-Muslim conflicts - 7/10
Date: 10 Dec 92 22:42:22 -0600
Distribution: world
Organization: Univ of Wisc, Dept of Chem Engr

The following are excerpts from an interview of Asghar Ali Engineer by Sridhar
D. Damle, a free-lance reporter for India Tribune (Chicago) and co-author with
Walter K. Anderson of the book "The Brotherhood in Saffron: The Rashtriya
Swayamsevak Sangh and Hindu Revivalism", Vistaar Publications, New Delhi,
1987.  Some extraneous or redundant material has been deleted; a few
grammatical errors have been corrected; subheads have been put in for clarity.
 
The interview took place on Dec 2, 1990, in Chicago.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. REFORM IN THE MUSLIM COMMUNITY

D: One of the complaints of Muslim social reformer Hamid Dalwai,
he says that there is a process of modernisation of the society
among the Hindus, he says that there is a lack of the very
process among the Muslims. Do you agree with the comment, if it
is so, can you identify this process today?
 
A: You know, I am a strong critic of Hamid Dalwai. He never
sympathised with the just grievances of Muslims. He always
attacked them as communal.  Even went to the extent of saying
that you can't become secular as long as you are a Muslim. Now,
Ahmedabad riots, I had investigated in 1969, I know who was
responsible for it. Yet, Hamid Dalwai writes an article in
Maharashtra Times, in which he puts the entire blame on Muslims
and he ends that article saying that Muslims deserved a kick and
they got kicked in Ahmedabad. Now, such a person if he talks of
reforming a particular religious community, he will not be heard.
He will not acquire any legitimacy.
 
Ambedkar was also very critical of his community. He had a right
to criticise them. He worked for them, he worked for their
genuine grievances, he made all possible sacrifices for that, he
acquired a sympathetic image among dalits, they knew that what he
was saying is for their own good.  That was not the image of
Hamid Dalwai among Muslims. He always held Muslims responsible
for any communal riot, whether it was Bhiwandi, whether it was
Kalwa, near Panwel, whether it was Ahmedabad, everywhere he wrote
letters, articles in newspapers criticizing only Muslims.  I
don't think that such a person can legitimately talk about reform
and why there is a process of modernization among Hindus and why
there is no process of modernization among Muslims? There are
sociological and economic causes for that. But, he never tried to
understand that.  He was a man in a hurry, he wanted what he
believed, every Muslim should believe. A social reformer has to
have a lot of patience.
 
     ABSENCE OF MUSLIM MIDDLE CLASS
 
Whatever economic or technological progress has taken place,
Hindus have benefited much more than Muslims. Hindus have created
a strong middle class, which needs reforms. Muslims have not been
able to create a strong middle class, because their elite
migrated to Pakistan in '47. Those left behind, they were mostly
artisans, peasants, or small traders, such people. So, there were
no professionals, engineers, doctors, lawyers, large numbers I
mean. Unless you have a strong middle class, you don't feel need
for reform. So, in such a situation, you can't talk of reforms in
the abstract, you can't take one view and abstract, tearing it
off from the concrete social context.
 
I would like to give an example here. Say, a dam. Many of us
think it is a symbol of modernization. Nehru even called it
modern temples when he inaugurated Bhakranangal Dam. Now, whose
view is this? It is the view of those who are benefiting from it.
Lot of electricity, lot of water for irrigation. Take the view of
those who are thrown out, whose land is submerged, tribals and
small peasants, do they welcome that dam? They agitate against
the dams. Now they want to construct a big dam in Gujarat, Sardar
Sarovar Dam, how much opposition is there from tribals and
peasants? Because, they are the sufferers. So, why should they
welcome the dam. But we go gaga about it because we get more
electricity, we will have more television sets, we will have more
fridges, we will have more fans, more tubelights, but what about
those peasants and tribals? For them it is a curse.
 
So, modernization, you cannot take an abstract view, what is
desirable is from your point of view, whether you are going to
benefit, whether you are going to lose, wherever it has benefited
Muslims, they have welcomed modernization.  Whereever they see it
go against them, they oppose it. It has to be seen in that
context also. I am myself working for reforms in my community and
I have faced violence.
 
D: In the Dawoodi Bohra community?
 
A: Yes, I am fighting against priesthood, I am fighting against
orthodoxy.  They made four attempts on my life, and at all risk,
we are working for reform, because I am convinced that certain
reforms have to take place. Without those reforms you cannot live
in modern times. But, same time, you have to have patience to
understand why certain thing is rejected and why certian thing is
accepted. We have to explain to the people, a reformist has to
have all patience on earth. There is a difference between a
revolutionary and a reformer. Revolutionary wants to overthrow
right away, and that is possible only at the political arena
right now, it is not possible in the social arena. Social
traditions, religious traditions, social customs, they have very
deep hold on us, they cannot be overthrown like political regimes
overnight. Even the Soviet Union or many other countries which
made revolution, they could not change social traditions
overnight. Even today those social traditions persist and they
manifest themselves in one form or the other. So, a reformist has
to have a lot of patience, and also he or she has to understand
the social processes, social and economic rules, and try to bring
about change at that level also. Hamid, I am afraid, did not
understand anything of that kind, he simply kept on saying that
Muslims don't accept reform, they don't accept modernization,
Hindus accept it, Hindus are more secular, Muslims are less
secular.  He lost all legitimacy in that community.
 
D: There are more than 32 Muslim countries, can you show me the
name of a Muslim country which has modernized or has a better
middle class?
 
A: You know, you cannot generalize things like that. It is not a
simple question. It is a very complex question. There are
processes of modernization, there are processes of orthodoxy and
fundamentalism in each country. You have to understand a country
in all its complexity.  If fundamentalist forces are becoming
stronger, why? Again, we have to understand the political
context, we will have to understand the economic context, we have
to understand the social context. I tell my Muslim brothers, why
Hindu orthodoxy and Hindu fundamentalism is asserting itself, let
us understand it. It is easier to condemn something, it is
difficult to understand. Because, understanding requires a lot of
patience, a lot of study. But, we just read a few headlines in
newspapers and condemn or approve. That's not the way of
understanding a social phenomenon.
 
D: You are right.
 
A: So, there are processes at different levels and even in Saudi
Arabia, I would say, there are forces of modernization. They may
not have freedom to talk about it. Their articles may not appear
in newspapers. It does not mean that every Saudi Muslim is a
stinking fundamentalist.
------------------------------------------------------------------- 
-Srinivas				budaraju@cae.wisc.edu

Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian