The moral fibre being the wrap and weft of every faith, no divine religion can condone the dastardly killing of any human being. The Quran empathically declares that “whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land — it is as if he had slain mankind entirely.
And whoever saves one — it is as if he had saved mankind entirely (5:32).” As it is easily discernible here, the Quran, in a clarion call, declares the life of a human being as sacrosanct.
Condemnation of a terrorist act that consumes innocent human lives is at the least expected from any conscientious society. Yet moving beyond the mere condemnations, the time has come to reject as an evil phenomenon, the reckless terrorism that primarily targets innocents.
How can one reconcile with the slaughter of a 19-year-old engineering student Shivani or for that matter brutal murder of two 23-year-old BTech students? How is it possible for a Muslim worth his name to plan the death of two fellow Muslims, Mohammed Rafique and Aijaz Ahmed? Hadn’t the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, described the life of a faithful as more sacred than the Mecca itself?
We call ours a post modern time, yet loss of human lives either during a war or else in a state-sponsored military operation is anyway accepted as a collateral damage. On the contrary, not to talk of protecting non-combatants, in a war, Islam strongly prohibits even uprooting of fruit-bearing trees and destruction of standing crops. No purpose, whatsoever the reason or grievance behind it, can be served by targeting women and children. If somebody claims that the recent terrorist act in Hyderabad was carried out in retaliation of any grave injustice or even to advance any cause, as a Muslim I will feel not only outraged but alsohighly ashamed.
Yet I am able to muster enough courage to denounce the blood-thirsty politics of violence. Not in my name please, and certainly not in the name of Islam. My belief, my conviction and whatever little I know about the great religion of peace encourage me to affirm with all the moral force available with me that whoever and despite whatever the injustice or provocation, deliberately targets innocents in a terrorist activity is simply a terrorist, moreover a barbarian; he can’t be a Muslim or even a man of any divine faith.
Although narrow interpretations of Islam are more often exploited to justify the many violent campaigns, terrorist agendas are actually driven by many state and non-state interests. Alas the carriers of hate and bigotry wittingly and unwittingly become the foot-soldiers of these multiple and multilayered macabre interests!
Of course, this corrupt system brews injustice at every step. The plight of the worst downtrodden sections of the society in comparison to that of Muslims looks better in every regard. Agreed the scars of Gujarat pogrom are still fresh. Unless the criminal perpetrators are not fully brought to justice, the festering wounds will simply refuse to heal.
And trauma of Babri Masjid demolition can not be so easily erased from the collective memory. On the whole, the Muslim existence has been reduced to simply that of the scum of the earth. However, terrorism is no answer to all these grave injustices. Hate will beget more hate; violence will invite only more violence. The collective conscience of the Indian Muslims should guide them towards striving hard to claim their just rights through only peaceful and democratic means.
Furthermore as a Kashmiri, I will feel very ashamed if I am told that the terrorist act was carried to avenge the hanging of Afzal Guru. How can death of many innocents in Hyderabad carnage satisfy our notion of deep injustice? The psychology of Kashmir is badly berated and bruised. Yet we are fully satisfied that our collective struggle is for a dignified co-existence and not driven by any sentiment of hate or revenge; so, no terrorism in our name, please.
But have we already arrived at a conclusion that Hyderabad blast is a handiwork of Muslmans, be it Kashmiri or Indian? I had a long story to narrate but old RAW hand B Raman has made my task easier: “If there is terror, it has to be a Muslim. If he is a Muslim, he has to be from the IM. If it is the IM, it must have acted at the instance of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). That seems to be the thinking reflex of the police and the agencies.”