I read a page of history. The Crusades were wars of religion that began towards the end of the 11th century. The wars are believed to have taken place between 1095 and 1291. History reports that they were organized by European Christians, with the support of the Latin Church, to curb the spread of Islam, to roll back the Muslim expansion (in Palestine, Syria, Egypt) and recapture the Holy Land in the eastern Mediterranean.
Wars were fought a thousand years after Jesus Christ and 450 years after the Prophet Muhammad. Both preached monotheism. Both were inspired by Abraham and Moses. Among the Muslims, these are Ibrahim and Musa. Along with Judaism, the three religions are called Abrahamic religions. Therefore, the justification for wars is inexplicable. Despite wars, Christianity and Islam have survived to this day with millions of followers; most are tolerant and peaceful, some are warriors. Europe is largely Christian; Palestine, Syria, Egypt and some other territories where wars have taken place are predominantly Muslim nations.
The moral of the story is that no religion or religious group can defeat another.
What is jihad?
Yet the word jihad is in effect. Jihad, in Islam, according to Britannica, is a meritorious struggle or effort, primarily the human struggle to promote what is right and prevent what is wrong. In modern times, however, it has become synonymous with violent campaigns.
Love jihad was a monster invented by the Hindu radical right to terrorize young men and women. Narcotic jihad is the new monster, and it pains me and millions of Indians that an ordained bishop, Bishop Joseph Kallarangatt of Pala, is its author. While “love” and “narcotics” are real, attaching the word jihad to love (a natural human emotion) and narcotics (analgesia and an addictive drug) reveals distorted thinking.
The intention is clear. It is to provoke mistrust and community conflict between the followers of a religion (Hinduism or Christianity) on the one hand and Islam on the other. Islam is “the other” and Muslims are “the other” fanatics. A secular nation must eradicate such fanaticism, whether expressed in word or deed or through subtle means of discrimination.
There is no evidence that Islam is “expansionist” in India. The PEW survey, released in June 2021, dispelled many myths and lies. India’s religious makeup was reasonably stable between 1951 and 2011. There is a slight increase in the proportion of Muslims due to migration and the fertility rate among Muslims, although it has fallen sharply by 4 , 4 (1992) to 2.6 (2015), is slightly higher than the fertility rate among Hindus and other religious groups. Yet even by 2050, Hindus will constitute an overwhelming majority of 77% (1,300 million) of the population. Of the respondents to the PEW survey, 81.6% said they were raised as Hindus and 81.7% currently identify as Hindus; 2.3% said they were raised as Christians and 2.6% currently identify as Christians. The massive conversion to Islam is a lie.
It is not surprising that the Hindu radical right leans on the Bishop of Pala. Both target “the other” ie Muslims. We must remember that there have been times when the Hindu radical right has treated Christians as “others”. The “otherness” of any part of the people is unacceptable.
My school experience
I studied at a school run by Christian missionaries. The overwhelming majority of the students were Hindus from all walks of life. There were a small number of Christians and a pinch of Muslims. Each class was divided into several sections, but there was a class leader, chosen by the principal, the legendary Kuruvilla Jacob. In the five years I studied from Class VI to Class X, the class leader was AK Moosa, a jovial, friendly, but average student. In class XI, the last year, the head of the class automatically becomes the head of the pupil. The principal wanted a student who was tall and impressive and who could speak fluent English at school functions and on the annual day. Who did he choose? And there you have it, he named Mr. Haroon Mohammed! None of the students, and certainly not the Hindu or Christian students, thought that something unusual had been done. The word âappeasementâ was totally unknown to us.
I am glad that the Chief Minister, Mr. Pinarayi Vijayan, read the riot act to the bishop. I am glad that the Leader of the Opposition, MVD Satheesan, supported the Chief Minister’s statement that the government “will be ruthless against those who propagate such false theories”.
Those who speak mischievously about the jihad of narcotics should wonder about the unprecedented capture of 3,000 kg of heroin (or three tons!) Seized by the authorities during an attempt to âimportâ through a port in Gujarat. I can say with authority that no one would have dared to “import” such a huge amount unless he / she (a couple – not Muslims – had been apprehended) had official patronage at a sufficiently high level. raised.
The prime minister and the interior minister are expected to disapprove of discussions on jihad, love or narcotics. They are also expected to comment on the seizure of 3,000 kg of heroin. These are problems which have serious consequences for the internal security and social harmony of the country.