May 16 , 2008

‘The Culture of Tolerance’ - A Bold, Provocative and Discordant Book

“The Culture of Tolerance” is the title of a scholarly work of Syed Osman Sher whose letters and articles have appeared, from time to time, in Pakistan Link also. A civil servant who has held senior positions both in Pakistan and abroad, he migrated to Canada years back to spend his post-retirement years with his sons.    
His account of the entry into India of waves after waves of foreign invaders and immigrants and their interaction with the local populace and assimilation into the local cultural milieu is, more or less, in line with similar accounts of other historians. But, his interpretations of the facts of history, in regard to the two-nation theory, do not appear to be based on a pursuit of strict objectivity and an appreciation of the postulates leading up to the partition of the country.
They might also offer an affront to the susceptibilities of those nurtured solely on the concept the two-nation theory.  For, he contends that the two-nation theory was a myth generated and fostered by the British to facilitate and prolong their rule. The harmonious amalgam of Hindu and Muslim social and cultural practices had given rise to ‘a new Indian race’, he contends.
In his own words, ‘The fabric of society which was woven with diverse strands for one thousand years was torn into shreds during the British rule which created intolerance within its fold. It is a historical fact, he argues, that the imperial British have been very faithful to their old colonial policy of ‘divide and rule’ and then divide for ever.
 The Muslim rule in India, spanning over six centuries (1193-1857) is generally divided into two periods. The first (1193-1526) witnessed five successive Turko-Afghan dynasties. The second period of the Mughal Empire covered the period 1526-1857.
None of the Sultans or the Mughals interfered with the indigenous culture, traditions and faith. Many had Hindu mothers. Conversion to Islam was voluntary. The greatest impediment in the development of a composite culture during these centuries, accepts Sher, was the hold of the Brahman under the caste system.
Even a powerful monarch like Akbar could not succeed in effecting a synthesis of the two religions despite going to the extent of giving up his own faith in favor of a new creed, Deen-I-Ilahi,  which he thought should be acceptable to both communities. It was not. He died advocating a synthesis of the two creeds and cultures. Even his mausoleum adds a feature of Ellora caves of ancient India to its Turkish architecture.
The caste system based on discrimination by birth was so entrenched in the Hindu society that neither the Sultans nor the Mughal could make a dent into it. Nor, did they make a deliberate attempt at that. Being the rulers, the monarchs, their courtiers, aristocrats and even the common Muslim masses tolerated the pretensions of the Brahmans to superiority by birth.
In the caste hierarchy, the Muslims were placed in the bottom category of the untouchables.  Since they belonged to the ruling community, the higher caste Hindus did not treat them with the disrespect and disdain that was meted out to the untouchables of their own community. It was this intolerance built into the Hindu society by the caste system that led to virtual revolts against it in the form of Bhuddism, Jainism and Sikhism. These movements were eventually absorbed into the Hindu fold.  This faculty to absorb into the Hindu milieu alien beliefs created serious apprehension in the mind of the Muslim community.
The interaction between the two major Indian communities, claims Sher, was ‘so strong that sometimes they seemed to be merging with each other even in matters of religion. Both communities participated and mingled with each other in the cultural fairs and religious festivals like Dipavali, Holi, Ram Lila, Bansant, Eid, Muharram and Urs of Muslim saints…Today the Muslims of the subcontinent belong to various castes, higher or lower, by descent or by profession.’ 
Sher’s finding of a synthesis in values of the two communities is not shared by many other historians. For instance R.C. Majumdar, a well-respected Hindu historian, says, ‘Henceforth there were two communities in India, Hindus and Muslims, who formed two entirely separate entities, so far at least as religious and social ideas and political and civil rights were concerned.’  
Another historian of no less prominence, K.K. Aziz, found the movements of Kabir, Nanak, Tukaram, Chaitanya etc. for a harmonious intermix of the two communities and their beliefs, as ‘a subtle Hindu move to subvert Islam’. ‘Hinduism, far from compromising with Islam was actually manifesting its remarkable capacity for synthesis.’
Nirad Chaudhari, in his book of international fame “The Autobiography of An Unknown Indian” mentions the fact that orthodox Hindus would take a bath after the day’s business if it has brought them into contact with non-Hindus.
Dr. I.H. Qureshi, a world-known teacher of history, points out in one of his books that once a Hindu converted to Islam, he adopted a Muslim name, and ‘broke all conscious ties with the culture of the society to which he had belonged, and integrated himself into the Muslim community.’
As a humble student of history, I find it difficult to share the views of Sher that it was a satanic scheme of the British to divide the Indians. The communal conflict was their handiwork to prolong their rule over India.
The Hindu-Muslim antagonism was not merely religious or political, but was a clash of two separate civilizations. The incompatibility of the two people was certainly not the creation of the British.  The British did exploit this immense breach in Indian unity. They would have been more than human if they had not.  And, I am also convinced that the chief villain in the interaction of the two communities was the uncompromising adherence of the high caste Hindus to the caste System.
Mahatama Gandhi, a great social reformer, in his efforts to give dignity to the lowliest went to the extent of cleaning himself latrines. He called the shudras, the children of God. Yet he failed and was brutally murdered by an upper caste Hindu.
The treatment meted out to Pholan Devi by the high caste Hindus, her revenge and her murder, epitomize the deep-rooted bane of the system and its continuing evil effects.
With the spread of education particularly among women, and an expanding economy providing vast job opportunities, the grip of the system is loosening but slowly and imperceptibly.  Would it take another half a century to kick out completely the obnoxious system? Would the leaders on both sides of the border continue with the blame game ad nauseum?
The current fast pace of economic growth and the economy’s pressing demands for well-educated and talented youth – irrespective of their lineage and descent -  is causing the erosion of the caste restrictions and of elitism on both sides of the border, auguring well for the future of the people at large in the subcontinent. A culture of tolerance, as portrayed by Sher, is gradually replacing the aura of mutual suspicions. 
Meanwhile, let us not miss reading the thought-provoking book of Osman Sher. He may be reached at: Osman_Sher@yahoo.com
arifhussaini@hotmail.com