Sufism remains heart of Islam, even now
In a context like medieval India, SUfi SAINTS DID PLAY MAJOR ROLES IN SHAPING POLITICAL CULTURE AS WELL AS SOCIAL MORES.
This writer has just published a book, addressing some of the fiercely contested issues about religion and politics in medieval India, especially with regard to the crucial presence of Sufis, who styled themselves as friends and lovers of God. The critical social and political roles played by Sufis, in contexts in which religion and politics are inextricably linked to each other, are of enduring interest, not only to historians and scholars, but also to political propagandists and general public. Enjoying widespread veneration even in situations of hostility with regard to Islam and Muslims in general, Sufis are central to an understanding of religious interactions and community relations historically.
The chapters included in the book can be read as stand-alone pieces focusing on some of the most fascinating as well as contentious themes in medieval Indian history—subjects and issues which are otherwise either left untouched by historians, because of their sensitive nature or abused by interested parties in their communal propaganda. When read as a monograph, the volume as a whole attempts to combat all kinds of intellectual absurdities, sometimes plain deceit and wickedness which mar our understanding of the place of Islam in medieval Indian history, especially the significant presence of Sufis, who were devoted to the love of God and service to humanity.
Historiographically, important issues which are also topical in these times of interdependence of religion and politics—the latter exploiting religion for legitimacy and justification of violence, and religion needing political support for expansion and imposition on the gullible—have been dealt in detail, neither bounded by a particular ideology, no matter how exalted its claim to panacea may be nor by identity politics with its separate blinkers. It is possible to research and understand contested historical questions rising above petty politics of various shades of red, green or saffron.
One can remain deeply tied to the practice of empirical research of an old style historian concerned about sources and evidence for the specificity of time and space and yet learn to retain a critical balance between the particular and the general through fruitful interactions with scholars working in the larger fields of social sciences and humanities. The wide-ranging topics covered in the book include contestations over the legitimacy of Sufi practices such as music and dance; Sufis’ distance from and involvement in politics and their perceived ability to perform miracles as a source of power and prestige in society; and the politically sensitive question of conversion and Islamisation, with Sufis indeed playing important roles in the formation of Muslim communities in various regions of the Indian subcontinent. These themes and issues have been subjected to a lot of abuse by political groups in modern times.
One of the main objectives of this book is to address these modern concerns with a more informed and accurate understanding of what happened in medieval India, when large parts of the subcontinent were ruled by a host of Muslim dynasties, with their roots in what is now Afghanistan and Central Asia. These dynasties created large empires, with considerable political stability and conditions for harmonious social relations and tolerance for religious, cultural and ethnic diversities; peaceful coexistence of a remarkable kind that has come down to modern times in the form of an amazing unity in diversity— a phenomenon the world outside is often unable to comprehend.
A look at the fascinating historical legacy makes it intelligible—a broad-based political system creating conditions for a pluralistic social and cultural milieu, with Sufi saints and other religious gurus playing significant political and social roles. Religion and politics are closely linked to each other, yet those in the business of government are expected to maintain critical distance—not in the westernmodern sense of secularism, but a peculiar Indian notion of recognising the presence of various religious groups; indeed, often using them for legitimacy and validation, but not allowing them to dictate terms. Yet, in a context like medieval India, Sufi saints did play major roles in shaping political culture as well as social mores. They enjoyed large followings of the kind that has continued in modern times— followings transcending communal religious boundaries. Despite some questionable appropriations and tactical compromises, Sufism remains the heart of Islam, practising and preaching in the language of love even in these times of terror and violence. (Based on my book, Lovers of God: Sufism and the Politics of Islam in Medieval India, just published by Manohar Books, New Delhi). The slogan, “Jai Jawan, Jai Kisan” was immortalised by former Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri, who, during his 18-month-long tenure had underlined the need for the nation to be always grateful to our soldiers, who guard our frontiers and the farmers who feed us. When the 1965 war with Pakistan took place, Shastri was at the helm of affairs and the firm manner in which he handled the critical situation was both a tribute to his leadership abilities, as also to his comprehension of the multiple problems faced by the country.
The forgotten kisans (farmers) were given a pride of place in order to send a redoubtable missive that in a food starved state, their contribution should always receive requisite recognition. Fifty-two years on, when India is both supposedly self reliant and an emerging power, the plight of Indian farmers remains an unsettling and disquieting concern. What is appalling is that our economy remains largely agrarian and more than 60% of the population is employed in the agriculture sector.
Successive governments have made tall promises to address the grievances of those who till our land, but at the grassroots level, reality is lamentable. In fact, the situation is spiralling out of hand. According to available data, in 2016, approximately 14,000 farmers committed suicide in various parts of the country, primarily because they were unable to repay their loans. The figure could be on the rise, unless the Centre and the state governments collectively put forth an implementable plan and not merely a removed-from-reality strategy formulated by bureaucrats and economists, who have scant knowledge of the actuality of the condition.
The crisis in Madhya Pradesh, where six persons were killed in police firing, could well be the beginning of a nationwide stir by the farmers, who continue to be deprived of adequate compensation for their crops due to the pathetic policies of those in power. While it is true that if the Madhya Pradesh government had handled the growing unrest among the farmers with compassion and empathy, the matter would not have escalated. Evidently, the administration did not adequately advise the Chief Minister, thereby allowing the agitation to soar out of control. The distressing matter is that a similar discontentment is brewing in neighbouring Maharashtra and is thus threatening to blow up beyond proportion. It is a coincidence that the first two states hit by the fresh stir happen to be governed by the Bharatiya Janata Party, which unfortunately, is trying to cover up the limitations of its own governments by giving it a political hue, instead of addressing the core issues in this complicated scenario.
It is but natural that the Congress and other political parties would try and encash on the developments, yet the onus of finding a solution lies with the Central and state governments. Bhupinder Singh Mann, president of the Bharatiya Kisan Union, has reminded the Prime Minister of the assurances he made from the ramparts of the Red Fort during an Independence Day address, where he pledged to double the income of the farmers. Prior to this, he had spoken of paying the kisans at least 50% more than their cost of production. In Uttar Pradesh, the Prime Minister had hinted at a loan waiver. It is obvious that once the expectations have been raised, the disappointment is always magnified when the implementation does not take place.
In addition, nothing has been done to improve the storage capacity of the agricultural produce or to assist the farmers who have to travel long distances to mandis, without getting sufficient compensation for their crops. The step-motherly treatment to the farmers could very well precipitate into a point of no return crisis, unless the Prime Minister steps in and gives a road map, which has clarity and obtainable objectives.
The supreme irony is that on one hand, a clear focus remains on the contribution of our brave soldiers, whose sacrifice is highlighted on a daily basis, while on the other, the plight of the farmers continues to prey on one’s mind as a tormenting question. It is apparent that the priority attached to the agriculture sector is pitiably low in the government list. How else would one explain that successive governments have failed to honour two Indians who have contributed more than many others in the past conferred with the Bharat Ratna? The reference is to Dr M.S. Swaminathan, the father of the Green Revolution and to Dr Verghese Kurian, the man who ushered in the milk revolution, and the mastermind of Amul. Did they not deserve the nation’s highest award?
Several top BJP leaders have acknowledged Shastri’s emphasis on the need to back our jawans and kisans. However, the present dispensation finds it politically more prudent to highlight the role of the soldiers, since it is in line with their political thinking, but have not found it worth their while to underline the role of the kisans, who form the backbone of the country.
Iqbal’s couplet, echoes the alarming dimensions of the unrest: “Jis Khet Se Dahqaan Ko Muyassar Na Ho Rozi, Uss Khet Ke Har Khosha E Gandum to Jala Do (consign to flames every ripening ear of wheat from a field that fails to provide the daily bread to those who till it). The farmers’ agitation is a wakeup call. Between us.