Posted Feburary 10, 2001

Founded in 1941 by the journalist and self-taught Islamic scholar Sayyed Abul 'Ala Maududi, the Jama'at-i-Islami is today one of the most active and well-organised Islamic movements in South Asia, with units in India, Pakistan, Kashmir, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. The influence of the Jama'at is not limited to South Asia, however. Through translations of Maududi's writings into various languages and through organisational and other contacts with other Islamic groups and movements, the Jama'at has exercised a powerful impact on Muslim revivalist thinking and efforts in many other parts of the world.

 Much has been written about the life and works of Maududi, the genesis and growth of the Jama'at in its South Asian context, and, particularly, its ideology. Briefly put, the Jama'at sees Islam as a complete world-view and way of life, dealing with not just the individual believer's relations with God, but also embracing all collective affairs. God is said to have sent a long chain of prophets to teach the pristine religion of al-Islam ('The Surrender'), and His last prophet, Muhammad, was commissioned with the last revelation, the Qur'an, which, along with the Prophetic example, is believed to henceforth be the sole guide for human beings and the only means through which salvation in this world and in the next may be had. Islam, then, is seen as the only perfect religion. All other religions are believed to be either false human creations or else distortions of the ultimate truths that prophets prior to Muhammad were sent by God to preach.

 Given the Jama'at's understanding of Islam as the only completely true religion and as the only means for ultimate salvation, the question of how it sees Muslims relating to other faiths and to their adherents is a particularly crucial one. This is an issue about which little has hitherto been written. The problem assumes particular salience in a multi-religious context like India's, where Muslims are a relatively small and vulnerable minority. Reconciling a commitment to their missionary calling, which they see as their principal duty, on the one hand, and an acute awareness of the beleaguered minority status of the Indian Muslims, on the other, Islamic groups in India have had to chart a delicate balance between what might seem the conflictual demands as members of the world-wide Muslim ummah and as citizens of what, in theory, still remains, a secular, non-confessional and democratic state. How citizenship of a non-Islamic state can be comfortably accommodated with a commitment  to an Islamist vision of Islam as an all-encompassing ideology and way of life is a crucial issue that many Muslims in India and in other similar minority contexts are faced with. This article seeks to examine how the Jama'at-i-Islami Hind (JIH), the Indian unit of the Jama'at, has sought to come to terms with a situation of considerable religious pluralism, despite its firm belief in Islam as the only true and perfect religion and its commitment to a vision of Islam as an all-embracing socio-political system. In particular, it focuses on the JIH's own missionary agenda and examines how it has been sought to be moulded in order to take into account the imperative of building bridges with people of other faiths, by critically examining some of the writings of key JIH ideologues as well as recent initiatives made by the JIH to promote inter-faith dialogue in India.

Islam and the Missionary Imperative

Islam, rooted in its insistence as being the only perfect religion meant for all humankind, is a missionary faith, and the JIH regards its missionary responsibility as its major task. Further, given India's overwhelming Hindu majority, the JIH's agenda, it recognises, of establishing the 'rule of Allah' in the country, as epitomised in an Islamic state and social order, cannot be fulfilled unless large numbers of Hindus accept Islam. Hence the added importance, a top JIH functionary writes, of Islamic missionary work or da'wat ('invitation') among non-Muslims.   How this responsibility should be undertaken in a country like India, where inter-communal antagonisms are sometimes extreme, and where Muslim missionary efforts are regarded with considerable suspicion, is a particularly crucial issue. Mindful of accusations that have been levelled against it from militant Hindu and other quarters, the JIH is careful to insist that in its missionary work, its adopts only 'ethical, constructive, peaceful, democratic and constitutional means', while refraining from 'all such activities as are opposed to truth and honesty or are likely to provoke communal hatred, class conflict or social disorder'. This does not, however, mean that the JIH would renege on its commitment to propagating Islam and countering other religions. The Islamic missionary imperative is still its utmost priority, it insists, but this is to be done only through peaceful persuasion, not through force or conflict. Thus, the JIH declares that it would work among the non-Muslims of the country so that:
[T]he truth shall dawn upon them that Islam is the only just and humane order, and that success in this world and salvation in the hereafter consist in the sincere submission to their Creator, Master and Sustainer. At the same time, it would endeavour to acquaint them with the irrationality and harmful effects of polytheism, atheism and other false ideologies and systems of life.

Classical Islamic law developed in a context of Muslim political authority. Hence, the classical jurists devoted little attention to the status of Muslim minorities, and none at all to what was then only a hypothetical situation, where, as is the case in contemporary India, in theory at least, Muslims are neither rulers nor the ruled, but equal citizens along with people of other faiths. Fazlur Rahman Faridi, a member of the central committee of the JIH, and editor of its English weekly, Radiance, notes that, 'The classical jurists had little experience of living in a multi-religious society', and so suggests that the Indian Muslims must 'critically examine the contemporary conditions and seek guidance from the Qur'an and the Sunnah'  in order to learn how they must live in a context that the classical jurists could hardly have envisaged. Faridi insists that in their missionary efforts among their non-Muslim countrymen, the Indian Muslims must faithfully abide by the Qur'anic commandment of 'countering evil with good' (amr bi'l ma'ruf wa nahi an al-munkar), relating to them in a spirit of love. This, he says, is 'the most effective means to win over their foes' and to remove their misunderstandings about Islam. All human beings, irrespective of religion, are, another leading figure of the JIH, Sadruddin Islahi, writes, creatures of God and children of Adam and Eve, and this relation of 'brotherhood' calls for Muslims to 'show love and concern for their welfare'. The best way in which this concern can be expressed is to 'guide them to the path of Allah' by preaching Islam to them. This should be done through 'wisdom, the best possible guidance and argument in a proper manner'. Hikmat (wisdom) and nasihat (guidance) should be the two pillars of the Islamic missionary approach, emulating the style adopted by the Prophet. This demands that one should always keep in mind 'the welfare of those who are being addressed'. The Muslim missionary must present himself to others with love. While he should hate the evil deeds of others, he must not hate their selves (zat), for 'a doctor does not fight with his patient but with the patient's disease'. Besides this, Muslims must also seek to help non-Muslims in distress, providing them physical as well as financial assistance, as well as their loving concern. By doing so, their former 'enemies will turn into friends', the 'most hard heart will change into molten wax', and they would be convinced that 'there is no one more concerned about their well-being than us'. The Prophet Muhammad is taken as a model in this regard. The Prophet is said to have taken pity on the pre-Islamic Arabs as people who had 'strayed from the true path'. Hence, he spared no opportunity to serve them, helping the poor, the elderly and the orphaned, while also crusading against social evils such as robbery, drinking and adultery. As a result of his 'pious actions, morals, service and love', the enemies of the faith 'turned into its most trusted soldiers'.

The missionary enterprise that the JIH envisages is one in which all Muslims, men as well as women, no matter what their station in life, have a crucial role to play. All Muslims must be conscious of being members of 'the best of the nations' (khair al-umma), charged with the responsibility of spreading God's Word and seeking to enforce His laws throughout the world. The Islamic mission is not to be restricted to mere preaching. Rather, it must express itself in active social intervention, working to transform society and usher in a new social order based on Islamic values. Thus, besides seeking to communicate Islam to people of other faiths in a spirit of love and concern, Muslims must also strive to promote 'social, political and economic justice for all'. This is seen not simply as a missionary ploy or a means to establish closer and more friendly relations with non-Muslims, but as a religious duty binding on all Muslims. The JIH, it declares in a document detailing its aims and objectives, must work for 'safeguarding human rights, promoting democratic values and containing the upsurge of fascism in the country'. As members of the khair al-umma, Muslims, the JIH insists, must seek to 'promote fellow feelings among people and seek the ascendance of moral values', issues of concern for people of all communities. 'To enjoin the good and forbid the evil', a phrase that appears repeatedly in the Qur'an, is said to be the responsibility that God has entrusted the Muslim community with, this being 'the reason for its creation', it's 'defining symbol', and Muslims must abide by this divine responsibility. Alongside this, the JIH calls for joining hands through 'mutual co-operation' with non-Muslims in 'promoting the good, eradicating evil, solving social and economic problems and undertaking social service activities'. This includes working with others for establishing social equality and opposing discrimination based on the caste system and the practice of untouchability. This struggle, given its nature and the magnitude, must necessarily be one in which Muslims work along with people of goodwill from other communities, for Muslims cannot hope to tackle these issues by themselves.The fight against poverty is also seen as an integral part of the Islamic mission, for according to the Prophet Muhammad, poverty often inclines people to apostasy.  Service of others (khidmat-i-khalq), writes Abdul Moghni, a senior JIH leader, is a 'form of worship', a means to attain God's favour and 'a jihad in God's path'. To fight against oppression, he says, is in fact the highest form of jihad. Without fulfilling the 'rights of others' (huquq-ul ibad), one's own duties to God and the rights He has over us (huququllah) cannot be complete. Striving against evils and crusading against injustice, irrespective of the religion of the victim, is the 'highest form of faith (iman), and for this Muslims must work along with people from other communities, as well as secular and democratic political parties.

The struggle for democracy is also part of the JIH's mission, as it sees it. Although the JIH is opposed to the concept of democracy as such, wherein it is the people, not God, who frame the law, it adopts a pragmatic approach to the issue, maintaining that 'under the present circumstances it considers democracy as the best form of politics for the country'. The alternative to democracy is Hindu fascism, and hence the JIH sees itself as charged with responsibility of seeking to build bridges with democratic forces among the non-Muslims of the country who, too, are opposed to a Hindu fascist take-over. Further, the JIH seeks to 'direct its criticism against oppression, exploitation and the lifestyle based on violence and militancy at every level'. Muslims, 'Abul Lais Islahi Nadwi, the former amir of the JIH says, must not enter into communal conflicts with people of other faiths or resort to actions that might 'cause grave damage' to the community. Rather, they must strive for promoting peace inter-communal harmony and unity. Through such joint efforts with democratic elements among non-Muslims, the JIH sees Muslims as playing a central role in the building of a new society based on values that Islam upholds and that are equally dear to others. Given the JIH's vision of Islam as not simply a spiritual relation between the individual believer and God, but, more than that, also a complete code of conduct for one's personal and collective life, this insistence on active social intervention is seen as an integral part of the expression of a believer's commitment to Islam and as an essential task of the Islamic mission.

If preaching Islam to non-Muslims is a central task before the Muslims, so, too, is the need for Muslims to revise their own understandings of Islam and their relations with people of other faiths. Thus, Sayyed Jalaluddin 'Umri, member of the central committee of the JIH, claims that the JIH, with its fierce opposition to all forms of communalism, including even the Muslim nationalism of the Muslim League which led the movement for the creation of Pakistan as a separate state for the Muslims of India, can play a major role in promoting inter-communal harmony by presenting a vision of Islam as a religion not meant for Muslims alone, as many Muslims see it, but, indeed, as meant for the welfare of all humankind. Communalism of any variety, including Muslim nationalism, is seen as leading to hatred and ultimately to fascism, and hence is to be condemned. Because, he says, Muslims have traditionally, though erroneously, seen themselves as a community (qaum) instead of as an ideological group (millat), and the Hindus, in turn, view them as such, fierce inter-communal antagonisms have resulted as various communities have fought for worldly ends. Consequently, Hindus tend to see Islam as the religion of their 'enemies' who had ruled over them for centuries. The Muslims, for their part, have regarded Islam merely as the religion of their own community, not as a system meant for the welfare and salvation of the whole of humankind. They must now realise that they are not like any other community, concerned solely with their own worldly interests. Rather, they are the 'heralds of the truth' (haqq ke 'alambardar), charged with the responsibility of upholding God's religion, establishing divine justice and crusading against all social evils. If Muslims are not a community in the conventional sense of the term, they must not be concerned solely about their own worldly gains. Rather, being an 'ideological community', based not on descent or race but on common belief and faith, they must model their lives solely on the Qur'anic commandment of 'enjoining what is good and forbidding what is evil', even if this might seem, at times, to go against the community's worldly interests.

A complete transformation of perspective is called for on the part of the Muslims, and the JIH sees itself as taking the lead in presenting Islam as a religion meant for all, and as the only solution to the manifold problems of worldly existence as well as the only means to 'success' in the life after death. It is necessary, 'Umri writes, for Muslims to actively combat prejudices and misunderstandings and exercise a generous tolerance, so that others 'listen to the Truth and understand it'. For this purpose, it is claimed, the JIH has sought to establish close links with people of other faiths, inviting them to its meetings to speak about their own religions and to 'learn the truth' about Islam, involving them in its relief and social welfare programmes working among people of all faiths, and reaching out to non-Muslims through literature in various local languages as well as enrolling them as its 'helpers' (ma'avun). In this way, 'Umri says, the JIH uses 'constructive and peaceful means' in order to 'prepare people's minds and public opinion for a healthy revolution (saleh inqilab) in the country's collective life'.

Reconciling Faith With Citizenship:

Muslims in India are often looked upon with suspicion by others for allegedly harbouring 'extra-territorial' loyalties and 'pro-Pakistan' sentiments, being seen as 'Pakistani fifth columnists' and 'traitors' for their role in the Partition of India. Reconciling faith in and commitment to Islam, on the one hand, and loyalty to the Indian state, on the other, has, therefore, appeared as a vexed issue and one not capable of easy resolution for many Muslims. With its own vision of Islam as an all-comprehensive way of life, of which the Islamic state is seen to be a necessary pillar, as well as its fierce opposition, in theory, to nationalism, this question is of particular concern to the JIH. The JIH views the establishment of an Islamic state in India, ruled in accordance with Islamic law, as part of its long-term agenda. This is seen as being the culmination of a long process of training the minds of the people and inviting them to Islam. When sufficient numbers of Indians accept Islam, the Islamic state can be set up. Till then, however, the Indian Muslims must reconcile themselves to being a minority. The Indian Muslims, the former amir of the JIH, notes, must realise that besides being members of the global Muslim millat, they are also citizens of India. Besides having citizens' rights they also have duties towards the state and the country, and the JIH insists that they must be mindful of these as well. 'Love for one's country (hubb-ul watan) is part of the faith', 'Abdul Moghni, a top JIH leader, writes, quoting a well-known tradition attributed to the Prophet Muhammad. Hence, Muslims should be loyal citizens of the state. However, they must be careful to steer clear of national chauvinism and 'nation-worship' (vatan parasti), for not only is this akin to polytheism (shirk) but is also the cause of great strife and conflict.

 The Indian Muslims have a dual responsibility, as Muslims and as Indian citizens, says Nadwi, former JIH amir, and both demand that the Indian Muslims should take an active interest in the affairs of their country. The mission of the JIH is 'invitation to the Truth" (da'wat-i-haq), and, accordingly, the Muslims should make sincere efforts to improve the conditions of their own country. God is the 'sustainer' (rabb) of not just the Muslims alone, but of 'all the worlds' (rabb-ul 'alamin), and hence Muslims must work for the welfare of all Indians. The best way to do so, 'Umri writes, is to present the message of Islam to them, for it is only by accepting Islam in their hearts that they can achieve 'success' in this world and in the life after death. The Muslims must, therefore, shed the insularity and aloofness that decades of fear and persecution, real and imaginary, have forced them into, and strive for establishing good relations, 'based on love', with people of other faiths, working along with them for a better society and jointly struggling against social evils such as poverty, ignorance, social inequalities and violations of human rights, as a reflection of their commitment to the Qur'anic commandment of 'enjoining good and forbidding evil'  Such co-operation with others is indispensable, for 'all the inhabitants of India are passengers in the same boat. If it reaches the shore, we would all have arrived at our destination, but if it drowns, then we will all perish together'. The Indian Muslims must not lose hope in the face of the ever-present threat of anti-Muslim violence and the pervasive discrimination that they face. Muslims must not despair, for this 'is a completely wrong reaction, against religious commands, and against the glory of the Muslims', because despair is 'akin to disbelief'. Muslims may fight in self-defence if the need arises, but must not, under any circumstances, attack innocent non-Muslims. However, 'Umri says, Islam stresses forgiveness above revenge. Instead of getting further embroiled in endless communal controversy, Muslims must seek to build allies among their non-Muslim countrymen, many of whom are also opposed to communal strife.

 Defending itself from charges of being 'anti-Indian' and 'communal' (as the term is understood in India) and of seeking to prevent the Muslims from joining the 'national mainstream', Nadwi writes that the JIH's concern for the protection of the life, culture, language and religion of the Muslims cannot be constructed as narrow 'communalism'. In championing the genuine rights of the Muslims, which the Constitution of India guarantees for them as well as for all other religious communities, he asserts, the JIH in no way seeks to trample on the rights of others, which, he says, Islam explicitly and sternly forbids. Islam, he adds, insists on justice for all, irrespective of religion, and Muslims are charged with the responsibility of being 'the missionaries of justice in the world', of dealing justly even with their foes. Thus, he writes, the JIH's concern for justice is not limited to Muslims alone. 'Because of our common humanity, we must have relations of love and compassion with all people, irrespective of religion, but this must be based on morality and justice', he insists. This is why, he claims, the JIH has consistently spoken out against the violation of human rights of people of all communities, not just of Muslims, in India as well as outside.

Communal Riots: Their Causes and The Remedy

Post-1947 India has witnessed a series of acute communal conflicts between Hindus and Muslims, in which, inevitably, the Muslims have been the major victims. Recent decades have witnessed a growing involvement of agencies of the state in anti-Muslim pogroms, in which several thousand Muslims have lost their lives. The issue of anti-Muslim violence is at the heart of the Hindu-Muslim question, and the JIH has sought to actively intervene to reduce conflict and improve Hindu-Muslim relations. It sees anti-Muslim violence as a problem not restricted in its impact to the Muslims alone, but as having serious consequences for India as a whole, proving to be a major hurdle in the country's progress.

 Inter-communal conflict, as the JIH sees it, stems, at root, from a lack of proper faith in God, a sharp decline in moral standards and an instrumental use of religion for pursuing this-worldly interests. Sayyed Hamid 'Ali, a top JIH ideologue, writes that if Muslims were to recognise themselves as being not just another community, defined on the basis of birth, but as an 'ideological group' commissioned to establish love, justice and good relations with all others, helping the oppressed of all communities in their struggles for justice, the communal problem would go along way towards being solved. They must, therefore, rise above temptations and revive true Islamic morality in their personal lives, thereby earning the goodwill of others. Likewise, according to Sayyed Ahmad 'Uruj Qadri, a JIH spokesman, if Muslims were truly to follow the teachings of Islam, through their 'good deeds' and 'high moral standards' they would ensure that 'their enemies of today would tomorrow become their friends and helpers'. Qadri calls for Muslims to shed their 'communal' attitude, and to be guided in their dealings with others only by Islamic commandments, not by what they see to be Muslim 'community interests', for this is a manifestation of jahiliya, the pre-Islamic age of 'ignorance'. Thus, they must not hesitate from sternly condemning the 'excesses' (zyadati) committed by fellow Muslims against others, while, at the same time, they should also learn to exercise restraint in the face of attacks by others. In addition, they must actively seek to establish bonds of good-will with people of other faiths, helping them in their troubles, so as to convince them that Islam is 'the best guarantor of their success in this world and the next'.

Muhammad Yusuf Islahi, another writer associated with the JIH, argues that the Muslims must 'desist from all such thoughts and actions that might cause the majority [Hindus] to seek revenge or which would create distance and hatred or lead to separatism', seeing this as their 'moral and religious duty' (ikhlaqi aur dini farz). India, he says, can only progress and prosper in a climate of 'love and good relations between different communities', and hence the Muslims must behave in such a manner that their existence 'is seen as a blessing for this country and as a fundamental necessity'. By manifesting their faith in this way, the Muslims would be able to convince others that they have a             ' reliable and successful ideology and system of life that is the best means for the construction, progress and welfare of the country'. Muslims must strive to counter all forms of communal conflict and work for inter-communal harmony to create an environment in which all communities might prosper. In particular, Muslims must steer clear from rioting and uncalled-for violence, for this will provide a convenient pretext for anti-Muslim forces to attack them. However, in the face of continued anti-Muslim attacks, Muslims can take to self-defence, a right granted to them by the Indian Constitution and a divine duty, but this should be conducted within the bounds of Islamic morality, which limits violence to be directed only towards the guilty.

Communalism, Naim Siddiqui, another JIH leader, writes, is based on 'worship of the community' (qaum parasti) which is a negation of the fundamental Islamic principle of tawhid, the Unity of God, which demands that God alone be the object of worship. It is rooted in materialism and in such factors as racial, linguistic, caste and communal prejudice, and hence is bereft of any moral principles that can unite people across confessional boundaries. 'My community, right or wrong' is a complete violation of Islamic principles as well as of all standards of universal morality, he says. Communalism is free from all moral restraints and the fear of God or punishment after death in its blind pursuit of worldly interests, and does not balk at harming others in its uncontrolled quest for serving its own purposes. It thrives on hatred of the 'other' and thus leads to endless conflict. The solution , then, is a revival of morality and fear of God's wrath, for one will be accountable to Him for all of one's actions. Firm faith in God and Divine retribution restrains people from infringing on the rights of others and indulging in evil deeds. True faith would drive people to fight against all forms of oppression, including communal strife and the violation of the rights of others, to appreciate the good qualities in people of other communities in addition to one's own, and to be ready to speak out against all oppressors, even if they be from among one's own community. For this purpose, Siddiqui calls for the launching of a 'living movement' (zinda tehrik) of people of goodwill from all communities to struggle against communalism and other forms of oppression. Despite their differing religious beliefs, they would be united in a common commitment to 'God-worship', truth, morality and service of the oppressed. They would create a 'strong army' of workers whose only weapon would be 'high morals', and they would be ready to sacrifice their all in their fight against injustice and communal strife. Every Hindu and Muslim of 'good character' should join this team, which should set up 'peace committees' in various localities.

 Reconciling a multiplicity of often conflicting identities is a challenge that all plural societies face. The problem is particularly acute in India, with its numerous religious, linguistic, caste, regional and ethnic groups, which has, on numerous occasions, led to fierce inter-communal violence. A narrow nationalism that seeks to deny particular identities, is a major cause of conflict, writes Nadwi. In order to effectively tackle such conflict, it is necessary, he writes, to move away from the vision of a homogenous, culturally monolithic nation, as insisted upon by Hindu nationalists, and to celebrate pluralism and accommodate the identities of various groups within their 'natural limits'. Each community should be allowed to preserve and promote its own identity, as guaranteed by the Indian Constitution.
 Sayyed Jalaluddin 'Umri, a senior JIH leader, sees inter-communal conflict as stemming, at root, from a sinister manipulation of religion for political ends, this being a betrayal of the actual message and import of religion itself. He writes that the present-day religious leadership of all communities is in the hands of irreligious, corrupt and power-hungry people, who, although they do not follow religion in their own private lives, use it to justify violence against people of other faiths. A new religious leadership is called for in all communities, one that abides truly by the teachings of their respective religions. Most people, 'Umri writes, do not have a deep or proper understanding of their own religion. Hence, they get easily swayed by emotional appeals in the name of religion, and are used by their leaders to indulge in violence against others. In this context, 'Umri sees an important role for all religious people to work together to 'prevent the name of dharma from being sullied' in this manner, struggling against the political misuse of religion and the spreading of communal hatred and violence.

 It is not religion per se that is the cause of inter-communal strife, as some insist, writes 'Abdul Haq Ansari, a scholar associated with the JIH. Rather, it is 'irreligiousness' and 'enmity towards true religion' that lead to the misuse of religion for achieving worldly ends, employing violence to pursue worldly interests. It is thus not religious beliefs but personal and communal interests that seek to guise themselves in the garb of religion that are at the root of the communal problem in India. Ansari suggests that hatred spread in the name of religion, and the belief that the glory of one's religion lies in the denigration of other religions and their followers, far from helping the cause of religion, actually 'give it a bad name'. In the Indian context, he says, the insistence by some Hindus that only Hindus can be considered as 'true Indians' and that if others wish to be so considered they would have to renounce their faith and adopt Hinduism is a major cause for inter-community strife and conflict. Ansari appeals for a broad tolerance, insisting that even if one believes that one's religion is the only true one, one has no right to denigrate other faiths. 'Instead of forcing one's religion and customs upon others', he says, 'one should respect the religious places, elders, books, customs, festivals and ways of life of others', without this necessarily leading to doubting one's own faith or to believing that all religions are the same. According to Islam, 'all religions are worthy of respect (ihteram ke mustahaq)', he says. To attack and revile other religions, their leaders, books and customs is 'a grave sin' in Islam, for the Qur'an lays down that there is to be 'no compulsion in religion'. In one's dealing with others, he writes, one should constantly be mindful of the fact that 'general human morals' (am insani qadron) and 'service and love' for all people are the 'foundation' (buniyad) of all religions. To serve people and deal with them kindly, irrespective of religion, is considered in Islam to be 'superior to much worship' (bahut si ibadaten) and is a 'sure means' (bada zariya) to 'acquire God's love and closeness'. On the other hand, to wrongly oppress others and trample upon their rights is not the way to serve ourselves, our communities or our religions.

Inter-Religious Dialogue: The Islamic Imperative

Inter-religious dialogue is stressed JIH writings as essential for not only its missionary work but also in order to build bridges with people of other faiths to remove mutual understandings and to combat communal conflict. Most people in India, writes Yusuf Islahi, are strongly wedded to their religion, and so inter-religious dialogue is an indispensable necessity for the country. A lack of proper understanding of the religious beliefs and practices of various communities has led to grave misunderstandings and prejudices and to 'the building of high walls between communities', issues which urgently require to be addressed, 'Umri writes. By building close links with people of other faiths and by showing a willingness to learn about their religions, Muslims will also be able to communicate to them the truth of Islam, and convince them that the Qur'an is the 'guide for all peoples' and that the Prophet Muhammad is the 'mercy for all the worlds'.

Dialogue entails a willingness on the part of the dialoguing partners to listen to what others believe and have to say, and, if need be, express a readiness to go so far as to modify their own views and beliefs as a result of the encounter. Although the JIH insists in that Islam alone possess the Truth in its entirety, and that, therefore, Muslims do not need to modify their own religious views, it sees inter-religious dialogue as important in order to clear mutual misunderstandings and prejudices and to build better relations between people of different faiths. The dialogue that it calls for is based on an awareness of all human beings as being creatures of the one God, the 'Sustainer of all the worlds', and as children of Adam, and hence, as brothers unto each other.  While firmly committed to its own faith in the superiority of Islam, it is willing to concede that other religions might also contain elements of truth, although not the whole truth.  Thus, all religions, even relatively unorganised traditions like Hinduism, are said to have a common faith in 'worship of God (khuda parasti), accountability for one's actions (muhasib-i-'amal ) and prophethood (risalat)', although these might have been 'distorted' beyond recognition over time. 'It is in human nature', writes Nadwi, to believe, in some form or the other, no matter how distorted, in the three basic principles of Islam--unity of God (tauhid), prophethood (risalat) and the hereafter (akhirat). Hence, theological parallels can be drawn between Islam and other faiths, which can help bring Muslims closer to others. Based on these common foundational beliefs, men and women of faith from different religious traditions can come together to jointly work for a better society.

 At root, most religions, says Yusuf Islahi, share certain common values, such as love for all humankind, concern for others, regard for the leading figures of other faiths, brotherhood, respect for other's life and property, helping the poor, etc.. Islahi argues that Muslims should appreciate these common values, and seek to work along with people of other faiths, based on a commitment to these values, to establish a just and peaceful social order. Truly religious people from all faiths should join hands to speak out against the political misuse of religion, and the manipulation of religion that leads to inter-communal strife, hatred and violence, writes Jalaluddin 'Umri. No religion preaches murder, rape, looting and the killing of innocents. All religions stress brotherhood, love and social justice, based on human values that they share in common, despite their various doctrinal differences. Hence, religious people from all faith traditions must, on the basis of their common commitment to these values, work together to combat communal strife, this being a practical manifestation of a commitment to genuine dialogue.  Besides appreciating the values that they hold in common and 'respecting the rights of others', people of different faiths must refrain from criticising each other's religions, which, the former amir of the JIH suggests, should be made a punishable offence. There must also be no compulsion in matters of religion, for God has granted human beings the gift of free will. 'Everyone has the freedom of belief', 'Umri writes, 'and on this basis religious people can solve their differences through free and frank dialogue'.

Matin Tariq Baghpati, a writer associated with the JIH, argues that Islam insists that non-Muslims are 'our brethren who have gone astray' (bigada hua bhai), and hence Muslims must actively seek to 'establish close and warm links with them infused by love and a concern for their welfare', sharing their joys and sorrows.  The basis of dialogue is an understanding of all human beings being creatures of the one God, the 'Sustainer of all the worlds', and children of Adam, and hence, as humans, brothers of each other. Dialogue, then, is not intended to be merely an academic or theological exercise, an exchange of views on religious practices and concepts. Rather, as a former general secretary of the JIH, Afzal Hussain, puts it, dialogue is to be expressed in active social involvement, working, on a 'wide scale' together with people of other faiths, based on 'strong relations of brotherhood' and on values held in common, for a more just and peaceful society.

 In order to bring people of various faiths together to work for common social goals, the JIH has sponsored several initiatives, such as relief works in the wake of natural calamities and communal riots, helping people irrespective of religion. In the face of a growing challenge from Hindu chauvinist forces, culminating in the destruction of the Babri Mosque in December 1992 that caused large scale anti-Muslim violence across India in which thousands of Muslims lost their lives, the JIH began to take a more actively involved stance in this regard. Shortly after the destruction of the mosque, in February 1993 the editor of the Jama'at's English weekly, Radiance, Intezar Naim appealed for immediate steps to be taken by people of all faiths who were concerned with the growing spectre of communal strife in the country to join hands, 'rising above personal, sectarian, community or party interests'. In July that year, the JIH held a convention in New Delhi, to discuss the alarming situation in the country, to which Muslims as well as non-Muslim social activists were invited. In his augural address, the JIH amir, Muhammad Shafi Moonis, called for a united struggle against fascism and all forms of discrimination. The participants at the convention decided to set up the  'Forum for Democracy and Communal Amity' (FDCA), which, the Radiance hoped, would 'help reconstruct a plural Indian society where every flower is allowed to blossom and every culture allowed to flourish, thus providing the finest example of unity in diversity'. Moonis was appointed  joint convenor of the Forum, Justice (retired) V.M. Tarkunde, a Maharashtrian Brahmin, chairman, and leading Muslim (mostly JIH members) and Hindu and Sikh activists and intellectuals known for their espousal of communal harmony were selected as members.  The FDCA sees itself as a broad-based, inter-faith group working as 'a democratic, humanitarian front […] against communal and fascist forces', based on a commitment to 'religious amity and a broad humanity beyond considerations of caste and religion', and 'mutual love and brotherhood'. It has chapters in several states, with its headquarters in Delhi.  This JIH-sponsored body has organised several conferences and meetings across the country, appealing for communal harmony and speaking out against religious intolerance, although its actual impact does not appear to have been particularly noteworthy.

An integral part of the inter-religious dialogue project, as the JIH sees it, is to correct the distortions and misunderstandings that Muslims and Hindus have about the history of inter-community relations down the ages. Baghpati writes that the British imperialists, in order to consolidate their rule by sowing the seeds of hatred between Hindus and Muslims, deliberately distorted writings about this history, portraying Muslims as 'blood-thirsty tyrants' and Hindu 'upstarts' as 'heroes' fighting Muslim rule. He calls for a radical transformation in the manner in which the history of Hindu-Muslim relations is generally portrayed, suggesting that incidents and examples of justice, love and tolerance between Muslims and Hindus, rather than of conflict and antagonism, should be highlighted, for Muslims and Hindus must realise that they have no choice but to live with each other in the same country. Indeed, much of the mistrust between Muslims and Hindus in India today owes to differing understandings of history, rather than being rooted in religion per se. That this must be directly addressed in any effort at improving relations between the communities is clearly evident in a JIH publication with the title The Dialogue Between Hindus and Muslims. This 'dialogue' revolves essentially around issues that relate to the history of Hindu-Muslim relations in India, including the demand for Pakistan, the question of Urdu, the issue of the minority character of the Aligarh Muslim University and Hindu-Muslim conflict. The partners in the dialogue are, from the Muslim side, all JIH members or sympathisers, while their Hindu counterparts are all either leading members of the militantly anti-Muslim Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh or those who share its basic premises. Recognising that problematic issues of history cannot be just wished away, Sayyed Ameen-ul Hasan Rizvi, one of the participants in the dialogue and former editor of the JIH English-language weekly, Radiance, says that the Muslims of today cannot be held in ransom for the sins, real or imaginary, committed by their ancestors. Such sins would be 'punished by God', whether these be cases of forced conversions or of temple-breaking, but each individual is to be accountable for his or her own acts, not for those done by others. If Hindus and Muslims were to understand this and if the former were to reconcile themselves to the existence of the Muslims in India as a fact that cannot be done away with, then, he says, the two could begin to work together for a new, just, equitable and harmonious society.

Inter-religious dialogue demands that people must seek to learn about other faiths. For the JIH this is seen as important, not only to clear misunderstandings that Muslims might have about other religions, but also to equip them with skills and the necessary knowledge that they need in their missionary work among others. Consequently, JIH writers have been commissioned to pen tracts on Hinduism, and several of these have come out in recent years. Some of these seek to compare Islam with Hinduism, in order to show Islam as a superior faith, while others simply explain the basic tenets of the Brahminical scriptures, which are presented as the defining texts of normative Hinduism The missionary agenda behind this concern to learn about other faiths is clearly spelled out. Thus, while suggesting that Muslims must 'study and understand the thoughts, religious beliefs and customs' of the Hindus, Baghpati writes that this is indispensable if Muslims are to 'come closer to them and communicate to them the invitation to Islam'. Particular care must be made, he says, to uncover 'those large portions of scriptures such as the Ramayana, the Mahabharata and the Buddhist texts that, despite having undergone distortions, are still worth acting upon'--presumably those portions of these scriptures that are in harmony with Islamic teachings. Muslims are advised to 'remind their Hindu brethren' about these 'many reformist aspects (islahi pahlu)' of their holy books, and to exhort them to  act in accordance with them. Baghpati says that Muslims should also be willing to listen to others 'in a spirit of empathy' and learn about their religions. They would then discover that therein there is much 'that appears as a form, albeit distorted, of Islam's own teachings'. Muslims should then build on these commonalties, presenting the Islamic teachings as their 'perfect form'. They should invite non-Muslims to co-operate with them on the basis of these common beliefs. This is in accordance with the teachings of the Qur'an, which instructs the Muslims to 'come to an agreement' with the People of the Book on the basis of what they share in common--service to and worship of the one God and an aversion to polytheism.

On the other hand, Muhammad Faruq Khan, the JIH's leading expert on Hinduism and author of numerous texts on the subject, takes a far less sympathetic view of the Hindu religion. He writes that a study of the Hindu scriptures, full of distortions, superstitions and immoral teachings that he sees them as containing, should convince anyone that 'the Hindu society has absolutely no knowledge of the true characteristics of religion (dharma)'. The Hindus, he says, are not even aware of the 'degeneration' of their religion and scriptures and of many of their beliefs being false. In this context, Khan says, a Muslim who studies Hinduism 'can instil in his non-Muslim brother a consciousness of the fact that the thing whose support he is taking is not a firm pillar to lean on'. This done, Khan argues, 'it will be easy to convince him of the value of Islam'.

 Although inter-communal harmony and peace and removal of mutual prejudices are among the objectives of the dialogue project envisaged by the JIH, it is clear that its ultimate aim is seen as helping to create a conducive climate and provide an opportunity for communicating the message of Islam to others. While the dialogical encounter is seen as helping Muslims clear their misunderstandings, if any, of the religious traditions of others, by cultivating friendly relations with people of other faiths its primary purpose is understood as enabling the Islamic message to fall on receptive ears. Thus, Baghpati warns Muslims that in their encounters with non-Muslims they should refrain from sharp polemics and heated debates as this 'causes hatred and is also a big hurdle in the propagation of Islam'. 'Our intention is to communicate the Word of Allah to them, not to create hatred', he says. Muslims must relate to others 'in a proper manner', so that they can be 'won over'. This is said to have been the method used by the Prophet Muhammad himself in his dealings with the non-Muslims of Arabia. The Prophet, Baghpati writes, 'did not seek to denigrate others or to defeat them in debate. Rather, his aim was to spread goodness and to bring others to the path of Allah, for which he adopted purity of intention (khulus-i-niyyat) and high morals (ikhlaq), not harsh, inflammatory words'. The Prophet is reported to have said, 'Convey good news, and do not give birth to hatred'. Likewise, Allah instructed Moses to 'gently remind' the tyrant Pharaoh. Since, as God says, 'All creatures are the family of Allah', everyone deserves to be treated with love and compassion, particularly the poor, orphans and neighbours, irrespective of religion. Islam, Baghpati says, does not preach hatred against any community, but only against wrong beliefs. If Muslims were to deal gently and kindly with their non-Muslim neighbours, they would be able to convince them that 'the source of all their ills is their having forgotten God' and that 'Islam has the solution to all these'. The Prophet is said to have formed a group to work for the poor and the oppressed, irrespective of religion, and in this way was able to impress many non-Muslims about the truth of Islam. In the same manner, Baghpati suggests, Muslims should work along with non-Muslims for common social purposes, such as the struggle against poverty, ignorance, corruption, caste discrimination and moral decline. This would provide Muslims with an opportunity of 'presenting Islam's programme of social reform before them'. In this way, Muslims would be able to faithfully abide both by their commitment to Islam's missionary project as well as by their duties as concerned citizens of India, working with others for building a more just and equitable society.

Conclusion:

The JIH, with its vision of Islam as a complete way of life, covering all aspects of personal as well as collective existence, has had to operate in an environment where the odds weigh heavily against it. Muslims are a relatively small, poor and vulnerable minority in India, victims of prejudice and periodic attacks and pogroms, and India has had a long legacy of inter-communal strife between Hindus and Muslims. Given this, the JIH has been forced to adopt pragmatic means to pursue its missionary goals. A comparison between the Jama'at in India and Pakistan is instructive in this regard. Operating in an overwhelmingly Muslim environment, the Jama'at in Pakistan has not had to seriously engage with issues of inter-communal relations and religious pluralism, questions that are of such great concern to its Indian counterpart. While the Jama'at in Pakistan has all along been in the forefront of the movement for the establishment of an Islamic state in the country, the JIH has been forced to accommodate itself within the framework of a theoretically secular and democratic state in India, going so far as to modify its own constitution to replace its demand for an Islamic state (hukumat-i-ilahiya or the 'rule of God') as an immediate goal with the more pragmatic and less well-defined aim of 'the establishment of religion' (iqamat-i-din). Although Maududi is known to have fiercely condemned democracy, as the rule of the people instead of that of God, and secularism, as 'irreligiousness' (la-diniyat), the JIH has, as we have seen, been particularly concerned about the protection and promotion of democracy and secularism in India, which are today increasingly threatened by the rise of the fiercely anti-Muslim Hindu Right. The JIH has, on numerous occasions, asserted that although, in its view, democracy and secularism may not be fully compatible with its understanding of  Islam, it would struggle for the protection of the present democratic and secular order, for the only alternative to it is Hindu fascism.

 Operating, as it does, in a context of considerable religious pluralism, on the one hand, and the immense social problems that affect the daily lives of most Indians, irrespective of religion, on the other, the JIH has adopted a pragmatic approach in its missionary work, which it sees as its principal duty. Thus, it has called for inter-religious dialogue initiatives between Muslims and people of other faiths. Joint efforts at social reform are suggested, as well as struggles against social ills and common problems. Dialogue and mission are, however, not to be seen as opposed to each other, Although in the process of dialogue it is realised that Muslims would learn about other faiths and discover values and beliefs that all religions hold in common, the inter-religious dialogue project is seen, above all, as a means to create an environment in which others might be more receptive to the Islamic message. In contrast to the radical rhetoric of certain Islamist groups, the JIH has counselled restraint and has appealed for tolerance and inter-communal harmony. In this way, it has sought to bring about what, for many Muslims, might seem a difficult balance to maintain-- between the demands of Islamic commitment, on the one hand, and their responsibilities as citizens of an ethnically plural, multi-religious society and what, at least in principle if not in actual practice, is a secular, non-confessional state, on the other.