Secularism or Dhimmitva?

 

Why our Hindu secularists never condemn attacks on Hindus by Muslims such as the one happened at Godhra? The answer is, a curious-mindset is responsible for this. I call this "dhimmitva". The precise motive of dhimmitva forces is to serve the religious line of Islam. The subjugation of reason and judgment and even conscience to the dictates of Islamic dogma has led them to perform crazy acts, all in the name of secularism.

Why our Hindu secularists never condemn attacks on Hindus by Muslims such as the one happened at Godhra? The answer is, a curious-mindset is responsible for this. Bat Ye’or recognizes this meek mindset as dhimmitude that never questions its inferior status vis-à-vis Muslims. In the Indian context, I called this dhimmi-secularism as dhimmitva in my Kannada columns.

We will understand this mindset better if we acknowledge the fact that Islam is very much involved here, either as Islam-phobia or as Islam-philia, and then figure out how and why.

The precise motive of dhimmitva forces is to serve the religious line of Islam. Like Islam, this dhimmi-secularism also has a deep thread of intolerance toward unbelievers of this kind of dhimmi ideology, especially if those unbelievers are believed to be a threat to the ambitions of Islam.

The fact that these perennial dhimmis are working tirelessly in support of the most intolerant, aggressive and fundamentalist part of Islam cannot be ignored. Take Jihad for example. It is this war, which is responsible for the creation of dhimmis throughout the world. As Bat Ye’or rightly says, non-Muslims have to criticize the prejudices and laws, which, over the centuries, reduced them to a humiliating subhuman condition. But strangely, if you start asking questions on the doctrine of Jihad, the very next moment they will brand you as a communal fanatic, and even a terrorist who is trying to malign and swallow a peace-loving minority religion!

Of course, this is a standard response of a Jihadi activist. So, the voice of a fanatic Islamist finds itself replicated in “secular” mouths!

But no secularist will mind if you make any number of statements against Hinduism. They can tolerate any number of unfair criticisms against Hinduism, but no fair criticism on Islam is tolerated. In their eagerness to serve their Islamic masters’ aspirations and ambitions they needlessly denigrate their own religion, Hinduism.

This is so, because dhimmitva agrees with the Muslim notion of Islam’s infallibility. So, dhimmi-secularists never question Muhammad’s code. They do not allow Islam to be discussed frankly and openly like one discusses Hinduism. Of course, you can praise it! But there is no room for dissent and no room for theological doubt.

Even Muslims who criticize militant Islam are not spared. Note that how Salman Rushdie was vehemently opposed for his novel The Satanic Verses. There is no room in this psyche for different and moderate perspectives, even from the Muslims themselves!

Suhail Ahmad Banglori narrates an interesting incident, which describes one of the symptoms of dhimmitva. “In his insightful little book Muslim Politics in India, an Indian Muslim, Hamid Dalwai describes an instance of Indian Muslims demanding a ban on a book, and launching an agitation to enforce the ban. He also describes the uproar created by the alleged disappearance of a sacred hair from the beard of the Prophet Muhammad, enshrined in Hazratbal, in Kashmir. Dalwai points out that not a single Muslim intellectual came forward to denounce this agitation. He wrote his own forthright views on the subject, and approached an editor of a journal. However the editor, who was a Hindu, refused to publish the article”. Dalwai sums up his experience in the following words:

“A Hindu is used to playing several roles and he is an expert in assuming different forms on different occasions. I have already referred to Hindu intellectuals and given the due praise. But I must frankly state that there is a kind of Hindu who is always terrified when he thinks of Muslims. This is no doubt a shameful state of affairs. At every critical moment this particular type of Hindu pretends to be more of a Muslim than a Muslim himself, and thwarts the attempts of those who are trying to make the average Muslim less of a fanatic”.

Suhail Ahmad Banglori adds, “The model behaviour expected from the dhimmis is one of submission, and acceptance of all the disabilities imposed upon them. As a reaction to the terror, Hindus, as dhimmis, feel with respect to Islam, they have practised being inoffensive to Muslims over the centuries, and seek the Umma's approval or avoid the Umma's displeasure. If they organise themselves at all, it is on platforms, which the Umma certifies as permissible. Hindus thus cannot form parties on a Hindu platform, whereas the Muslim League lives on in India, after partition, without even a cosmetic change of name”.

Their mind declined under Islamic rule. They not only submitted to Muslim power, but also, in due course deeply internalized the perfect dhimmi mind-set. They never consider Hindus as equal to Muslims. They never care if Hindus would be left with lesser rights than Muslims. Even if it is lesser dignity, they don’t mind.  Like true believers, they never put Islam under critical examination as it is “blasphemous” and is punishable by death. And they have no courage to refuse the decision of “ijma” which is the consensus of the Islamic community, ummah.

This very dhimmi state of mind is responsible for the behavior of even the USA and Europe, which compete for the favour of the Muslim world by abandoning the cause of victimized non-Muslims to its mercies.

The subjugation of reason and judgment and even conscience to the dictates of Islamic dogma has led them to perform crazy acts, all in the name of secularism.

 (C) G. Anil Kumar 2002