Opinion
The Devil in Us
It is true that there is far more pluralism and freedom in
most non-Muslim countries. The more we open our souls to
the devil, the more he will find a nourishing environment.
On 13th May, 2020, a deliberate grenade attack on a maternity hospital in Kabul left at least 24 dead, with new born babies and mothers among them. The latter were specifically targeted. The Taliban refused to take responsibility and it seems that a faction of the ISIS had carried out the attack. The hospital is in an area inhabited mostly by the Hazara community, a persecuted sectarian group, both in Afghanistan and Pakistan. This is a crime which defies description: an evil manifestation of a logic that would be envied by the devil. This was also a crime that carried small headings in international news and disappeared a day later. Muslim leaders, governments and organisations were conspicuous by their absence in denouncing it.
On 18th May, a 19 year old Lebanese law student, Aya Ismail Hachem, was shot dead in what is being termed a hate crime in Blackburn, UK, while she was out grocery-shopping. It is worth noting that no one is calling the perpetrator a terrorist. Aya’s friends have started a fund-raising campaign for her family to carry out Sadqah e Jariyah in her name. Until recently, more than $25,000 had been donated by over 270 people. When donors came to know that Aya belonged to a particular sect, many of them requested for a refund.
In Punjab, Pakistan, a brother-in-law of Aasiya Bibi, the woman who was falsely incarcerated in prison for seven years on charges of blasphemy, was cleared by the Supreme Court and while he had to escape to Canada, he was killed. No news has come to light about the killers.
The seemingly unrelated events have two very important points in common. They resulted in killing of innocent humans and all three belonged to minority groups. The logic that drove the killers in the first case was, presumably, that neither the babies nor the mothers had a right to live. The distorted views that the killers held of their religion, the victims were kafirs and deserved to die. Whatever the source of this line of thought, it has found resonance among many Muslims, including those who would like to be seen as “open minded” and “tolerant”. These Muslims have an entrenched system of beliefs that they are on the absolute right and divine path, laid out for them through direct intervention; their interpretations and those of the clergy they follow is the “sirat ul mustaqeem” that will take them to Paradise and that all other paths lead to Hell. This is the foundation of extreme fanaticism that results in killing of members of “other” sects and religions on the one end of the spectrum and their readiness to donate to their “own” sect and not to another, even if it is for the same purpose. This hatred of the other manifests itself in various and often bizarre ways.
In recent times, there has been much debate on pluralism and rights of minorities, including the right to observe their faith without fear of oppression. Without doubt, there is far more pluralism and freedom in non-Muslim countries (except India and Israel), although the graph of Islamophobia has been rising consistently in the West. Christian minorities in Egypt, Bahais in Iran and Ahamadis and Shias in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan are targets of both vilification and violence. At the same time, there is an oft-repeated and self-righteous call for tolerance in Islam. Speakers claiming to possess deep understanding of Islam pontificate about the legacy of tolerant behaviour of the Muslim civilisation towards non-Muslims. There are repeated requests to Muslims to be more tolerant of other faiths and to “allow” them to observe the requirements of their faith without oppression.
Tolerance usually means acceptance, or living with an action, views, ideas or people one dislikes.
There are two issues here. One is that persecution of other sects or groups, especially the much maligned Ahmadis, is not mentioned. By their absence, would their persecution be justified?
The other issue is the use of the word “tolerance”. There is something deeply arrogant and self-righteous here. Tolerance usually means acceptance, or living with an action, views, ideas or people one dislikes. The root of the word is from medieval toxicology: how much poison can a body tolerate before losing life? Pluralism, which is what Muslims need to aim for, goes much beyond tolerance. It would be to embrace both similarities and differences of people and to work with them towards a world order of social justice. So much blood has been shed due to our small and limited abilities to wonder at, learn from, bedazzled by and love our differences. We have lost so many opportunities for peace and collective progress by highlighting and defining our dislikes based on colour, religion, belief, race, ethnicity, class and status. Should we really condemn or look down upon people of different beliefs?
The donors who wish their money to be refunded because Aya belonged to a different sect; the killers of babies and mothers who were members of families of different beliefs and the killers of Aasia Bibi’s brother-in-law, are in the same spectrum of hatred, albeit at different ends. It does not take too much of an effort to move from one end of the spectrum to the other. In fact, most of us have seeds of hatred, lack of empathy and indifference planted within us. The more we open our souls to the devil, the more he will find a nourishing environment.
![]() The writer is a development professional, researcher, translator and columnist with an interest in religion and socio-political issues. She can be reached at |
Cover Story
|
Tributes
|
Special Editorial Feature
|
News Buzz
|
Leave a Reply Cancel reply |
Update |
Hazaras have lived in peace in Afghanistan for the past eight centuries. Their troubles started only after they aligned themselves first with the Soviets and later the U.S invaders. Many took shelter with their brothers in Quetta and trouble followed. The issue is not based in religion; it is Afghans taking revenge for the atrocities committed against them.
Aasia Bibi case, shameful as it is, does not reflect Pakistanis as a whole. It has been played up in the media shamelessly as a political tool. To put things in perspective, the same country where a Christian and a Hindu served as chief justices of the Supreme court something that is conveniently ignored.