Naipaul’s leap into Hindutva

WHEN someone complained about the rising wave of Hindutva in India and compared it with Muslim fundamentalism, some respectable cultural ideologues dismissed the analogy with a vehemence which was quite perplexing. They thought it was erroneous to gloss over the distinction between cultural and religious nationalism.

Isn’t it true that most of our life has been spent on finding ‘subtle’ distinctions in issues which didn’t require any subtle differentiations of meanings? It is strange that some Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) ideologues chastise Muslim fundamentalism and glorify Hindutva-based cultural nationalism of India without caring that no amount of sophistry could absolve Hindutva nationalism of the religious bigotry and fanaticism which it entails.

I am not interested in suggesting that Muslim fundamentalism is conducive to any real understanding of Islam or it could be less hostile to other faiths, but Muslim theologians have been affirming all along that Islam is a way of life — a Deen — as opposed to being a religion in the narrow sense. But it is not proper for a religious group to relate its upsurge to the territorial and cultural nationalism while denying a similar phenomenon, for example,— Islamic or Christian fundamentalism — as something very different from its own phenomenon.

What makes me take up this discussion is the transformation of V. S. Naipaul, the Nobel prize-winning English novelist who got the coveted award last year. Having interviewed him for Dawn when he was busy writing Among the Believers and seeing him blush at the mention of Majnoon Gorakhpuri and Firaq Gorakhpuri as the two great men of Urdu literature for the reason that both of them belonged to Gorakhpur — the city of Naipaul’s own ancestors — I had found Naipaul look like an intellectual descendant of Lord Curzon, a pucca Gora Sahib. His main hobby was India- bashing.

I had remonstrated with him that he shouldn’t like to be classed with those who derived pleasure from India-bashing. He had shown his preference for the Germans and I failed to find anything amiss in his predilection. Had he been an India-lover, I could have traced back this built-in streak for his unstinted love for Germany for the unbelievably great crop of Indologists who had become the chief public relations men of Indian and Hindu culture. I didn’t give any attention to this equation. But now that he has made a U-turn — from a chronic India-bashing to his falling in the lap of Mother India of the VHP — I am a bit surprised how easy it becomes to be on the other end of the pendulum.

I have yet to come across even a highly liberal and emancipated Indian who may not be having some or gross confusion about juxtapositioning of ‘religious’ and ‘cultural’ elements in one’s mental make-up.

In India, religion and culture are almost identical terms and it is not utterly wrong to read ‘cultural nationalism’ as a clever phrase for religious nationalism. The Hindutva ideologues are happy that a Nobel laureate of the standing of Naipaul — who prospered in the business of India-bashing for too long — has joined their ranks and there are jubilations in the VHP circles that Naipaul has joined their ranks. He has written something very intriguing. Perhaps his publishers may have desired this controversial statement from him so that the readers of his works in the Muslim bloc could have another reason to go for his books. The typical Naipaul piece gleaned from one of his recent writings is as follows:

“... Islam is an Arab religion. Everyone not an Arab who is a Muslim is a convert (sic). Islam is not simply a matter of conscience or private belief. It makes imperial demands. A convert’s worldview alters. His holy places are in Arab lands; his sacred language is Arabic. His idea of history alters. He rejects his own; he becomes, whether he likes it or not, a part of the Arab story. The convert has to turn away from everything that is his...”

What a statement! But coming from a writer who is used to somersaults — the one who ripped the image of India asunder to earn him the accolade of a writer whose pen is dipped in sulphuric acid, it made me only wonder at the suddenness of change. Now he regards India as a country whose intellectual attainments knew no bounds. I don’t disagree with his views about India. Everyone is entitled to one’s leaps of faith. I thought that Naipaul’s marriage to a Pakistani woman might change his views to some extent.

One’s marriage with someone belonging to a different faith modifies one’s opinions about the cultural mainsprings of his life-partner, but the Pakistani wife of Naipaul couldn’t, perhaps, do more than prepare some Pakistani cuisines. The Englishman in Naipaul (however in an induced form) couldn’t be happy because he moved upwards on the social scale where ‘hot’ dishes were an anathema.

In India some Urdu writers — with the All-India Muslim Majlis-i-Mushawarat and some hardliners of the communist parties —have taken exception to Naipaul’s remarks. They think that his remarks have been published at a time when the West is busy proving Samuel Huntington’s thesis embodied in the The Clash of Civilizations as quite an appropriate diagnosis. After all, the Western economies need an abnormal fervour — and Islam-bashing provides an ideal game in the post-Cold War era.

I didn’t appreciate Naipaul’s books Among the Believers and Beyond Belief for the simple reason that a writer shouldn’t appear biased against a religion and culture right from the first word of his narrative. The moment a writer betrays his own bias, his claim of being ‘objective’ becomes ridiculous.

I believe Naipaul has adopted Dr Monje of the Sangathan Movement (in the 20s of the last century) as his spiritual mentor because he believed in the theory that every religion has a Matri Bhumi as Hindustan is for the Hindus and Arabia should be the natural Matri Bhumi of the Muslims because Islam originated in Arabia.

How the world is going to react to this awful formulation I do not know, but an immediate response from me is whether Naipaul would allow the aboriginals of the Americas, India and Australasia to move to their Matri Bhumis. In that case Naipaul should be looking for a home in Central Asia. Being a Brahmin, his claim on Central Asia could be entertained.

Shahid is match winner, should be in Test team

As expected, Pakistan made a clean sweep in Bangladesh though it is not a matter for congratulations. Pakistan failed to bowl Bangladesh out in the first two One-day Internationals and did so in the third in the last over. Given the fire-power of the Pakistan attack, the Bangladesh batsmen showed more determination than they had in the earlier two Test matches though in the absence of Wasim Akram and also Danish Kaneria, the sting was not there.

There was also an element of complacency which should not have been there. But Inzamamul Haq apart, who did not have a good tour mainly because he seemed pre-occupied with the health of his father, the old guard delivered in one or another and Abdur Razzaq was outstanding, as usual. After Chris Cairns, he must surely be the best all-rounder in the game and he seems to be getting better.

Shahid Afridi plays the way he does: when he is good, he is very, very good and when he is bad, he is horrid. But he has the unique ability to make a contribution, one way or the other. If he fails with the bat, he will pick up some wickets and when he fails in both departments, he will effect a run out. I think it is wrong to pigeon-hole him as an one-day player. Afridi is a match-winner and he is also a great team-man. He should be in the Test team. He happens too, to be one of the better fielders.

Though Wasim Akram may be disappointed, the selectors have done the right thing by leaving him out of the squad for the ‘home’ series against the West Indies. Wasim needs proper rest and not patch-work repairs.

The aim should be to have a supremely fit Wasim for the World Cup next year. The PCB and its panel of doctors can do only so much for him. It is for Wasim to look after himself.

Wasim admits that he learnt much from Imran Khan. But what he didn’t learn from him was that responsibility of staying fit remained with the player himself. Injuries are unavoidable more so since there is these days non-stop cricket. A player cannot be nursed back to fitness. He has to do it himself.

At the same time, it is essential that a fully qualified fitness-trainer should be attached with the team, someone who is a specialist in the sort of exercises that are needed for cricket. And before a team is selected, the players should get a clean bill of health from the fitness-trainer. Injuries will occur during matches and these are unavoidable but no unfit player should be selected.

I think that Wasim should not have hung around in Bangladesh once it became clear that he would not be playing the One-day Internationals. He should have been flown home and put in the care of doctors. The message should get through that the PCB attaches a premium on fitness. An unfit player hanging around does no good to a team or to himself. That Pakistan will need Wasim for the World Cup goes without saying, even his detractors will have to admit this.

I am glad that the Pakistan team continued the match after Shoaib Akhtar was hit on the head by a stone thrown by a hooligan-spectator. In any large crowd, there will always be a few bad eggs bent on spoiling the pleasure of an overwhelming number of spectators who go to a cricket match to enjoy themselves. It is quite impossible to provide water-tight security. But if someone were to hurl a stone, surely those seated around him would see him doing so. They could certainly identify him and point him out to the security people.

In other words, the spectators themselves should be involved in preventing hooliganism. Unruly crowd behaviour is not confined to the subcontinent. There was crowd trouble during one of the matches in the triangular tournament in Australia. Apart from the one incident, the crowds in Bangladesh appeared to be in good humour despite the fact that their team was losing.

There are no surprises in the Pakistan team that has been selected for the matches against the West Indies, in the home series that is being played away. I am absolutely delighted to see fast bowler Muhammad Zahid returning to the Pakistan team. He had been rated as among the fastest bowlers in the world when he had first played for Pakistan in the nineties. Then he broke down at Peshawar in 1998, with back trouble. The road back for him has been a difficult and a lonely one for he was very much left to his own resources to get back to fitness.

A multinational bank came forward with some money, a gesture not wholly acknowledged but the bank itself did not want to get any publicity. But, I hope, that Zahid has written them a letter of thanks for it marked his return to Test cricket. I am told that he lost a little in pace but is still pretty sharp. I hope too that the PCB will monitor his fitness and ensure that he remains fit.

The triangular in Australia is wide open with the South Africans who seemed out for the count fighting their way back and remain in contention. The matches are being fiercely contest and there is no easy ride. One indication of this is the unfortunate observation made by Steve Waugh about Steve Elworthy who was hit on the helmet by a vicious bouncer from Glen McGrath. Told that Elworthy had been taken to hospital for a scan, he is reported to have said that they wouldn’t probably find any brains there or words to that effect.

It seemed to be a singularly cruel remark and Steve Waugh said that he had been misquoted and, in case, apologised. There is only one thing worse than a poor loser and that is a poor winner. The Australians are the world’s best team but that does not gives them a licence to be arrogant and obnoxious. Cricket is a tough game and a batsman can get hurt. That’s part of occupational hazards. But one shouldn’t be seen to be adding insult to injury.