Wednesday, 28 October 2020

‘Naam Ek, Roop Anek’

Updated: February 7, 2015 4:45 am

India That Is Bharat

THE curious cuss in Satiricus knows that curiosity killed the cat. But despite the fatal fate of the feline, he cannot help curiously wondering…. After Peshawar and Paris, is the next stop Paradise? The holy Quran says Paradise lies in the shade of swords. But it does not say guns. So maybe there is a difference—the same difference as between life and death. Why otherwise would leader after Muslim leader condemn what happened in Peshawar and Paris? They have all assured the infidels of the world that Islam means peace, that what happened was anti-Islamic. Why, a “secular” intellectual among them went to the excellent extent of dauntlessly denouncing the perpetrators of Peshawar and Paris as “barbarians of faith”.

All these impassioned assurances to infidels should satisfy Satiricus. But do they satisfy the curious cuss in him? The cussed fellow asks Satiricus, how many Muslim leaders have condemned the slaughter at one place and the massacre at another? The answer of course is—dozens. Would they be, say, 30/35? Yes, they could. But according to American estimates the ISIS has 35,000. What do these numbers say? They say 35 Muslims say Islam means peace, as the Quran so says, while 35000 Muslims say they are slaughtering thousands for the “revival of Sharia”. Does that mean the Quran and the Sharia are two different and opposite scriptures of one and the same religion? To this question of questions this Hindu ignoramus has no answer, but the secular intellectual Muslim who called the killers of Peshawar and Paris barbarians did have. He says Mohammed’s Islam and Wahhab’s Islam are very different Islams, for Mohammed’s Islam as laid down in the Quran is immutable, but “the legacy of Wahhab” is “inherently” mutable and should be “disowned”. And as if to say in so many words the more Islams the merrier, he says, in addition to Wahhab there were Banna, Qutb and Maududi who preached their own Islam. To cap it all comes the unkindest cut—there is also one Gamal, according to whom Middle Ages interpretations of the Quran “should be thrown into the sea”. What can a stunned Satiricus say to all this? He has concluded that where Islam is concerned (or where Islams are concerned), it is safer for him to be an incurious communal cuss than to be a suspicious secularist.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Archives

Categories