If we gain, why not

If we gain, why not

580

1993 11-12 November-December 7-8 If we gain, why not (640)

A short time ago, I happened to meet an Indian leader who publishes an Urdu weekly. For a long time this paper had run at a loss, but later picked up and started making a profit. The history of its phenomenal upswing was interesting to listen to. He told me that when he had launched this enterprise, there seemed to be no way that the circulation could be made to exceed 3,000, and that this was a state of affairs which continued for a long time in spite, of his best efforts. Then, in 1985, came the controversy over the Ayodhya mosque (to the Muslims, the Babari Masjid and, to the Hindus the Ram JanmBhumi). Exploiting this issue to the full, he brought out a spate of sensational articles – most of them sheer bombast – with deliberately provocative captions. As anticipated, his paper’s circulation soared from a mere 3,000 to a spectacular 30,000. Congratulatory letters began to pour in from all sides.

While the Babari Masjid type of dispute is bad news for the Muslim community at large, it is, on the contrary, the best possible news for the leaders of that community, for that is the kind of news which is grist to every political and journalistic mill. It is no exaggeration to say that while, for the general Muslim public, it is a tragedy, for the leaders it is more of a comedy. It would be wrong to think that this applies only to a few stray cases; it applies to the entire Muslim leadership and the entire field of Muslim journalism.

The above success story reminded me of a certain Muslim villager who made a habit of visiting graves and durgahs (saints’ shrines) to ask for favours, although, strictly speaking, a good Muslim should visit such sites only to pray for the departed souls, the granting of favours being the prerogative of the Almighty. A religious scholar who lived in the vicinity tried to make him see the error of his ways by pointing out that such an act was tantamount to polytheism (shirk), but the villager’s experience told him otherwise. It seems that whatever he had asked for at a graveside has been granted to him–even the birth of a male child. The advice of the scholar, therefore, made no sense to him, and he countered with: “If I benefit from going there, why should not I go?”

For the past twenty years, the writer has been advising Muslim leaders to eschew emotionalism in politics and to adopt a quiet constructive approach. To this end I have had meetings with the more prominent of the Muslims leaders, entered into correspondence with them, focussed attention on this issue through my writings and tried in every way possible to elucidate this point so fully that they would be left with no arguments against my point of view. Yet no Muslim leader is willing to accept this advice. It is because they are no different from the villager by the graveside. Each Muslim leader in his heart of heart thinks: “why not dabble in emotionalism? It is to my advantage.”

It is a stark reality that what gives the greatest boost to both Muslim leadership and journalism is rioting. If communal riots were to cease in this country, we should see an end to their dominating influence.

According to Sajid Rashid, an Urdu journalist of considerable experience, “The most popular topic of the majority of Urdu newspapers is ‘riots’ and that, too, only Hindu-Muslim riots. The Urdu papers now find it inconceivable that a new issue should be published without some such sensational item. This is a matter of personal experience. The youthful editor of a weekly paper actually expressed such a desire to me. ‘If only there could be a riot – the circulation of my paper would increase.’