Reflections on Tagore's Gora:
Layers of ignorance and voices against prejudice
Dr. Mohammad Omar
Farooq
Associate Professor of Economics and Finance
Upper Iowa University
Physical proximity does not always ensure familiarity or lack of ignorance. It
is equally true in case of the people of our subcontinent. Even neighbors or
communities do not know each other very well. Earlier I translated the
following part of an article of Nazrul and added to Nazrul site: "... The
biggest tragedy of our national life today is that those who live the closest
to us, we know them the least. Due to the grace of the English, we know all
the languages from English, Greek, Latin, Hebrew to French, German, Italian,
Spanish, Czech, Scandinavian, Chinese, Japanese, Honolulu, Greenwich - we also
know their history and we make an effort to learn about their civilization,
but we don't, nor do we care, to know about the neighbor's home that is
adjacent to ours. Indeed, we even pride in our ignorance in this matter. Maybe
this is an example, of "Penny wise, pound foolish". [1]
I have also quoted this part several times in the context of Hindu-Muslim
relationship. But now I realize that I myself did not have adequate
appreciation of this comment of Nazrul. Many months ago when we had some
discussions about Nazrul, Rabindranath and Jibanananda, and I made some remark
about Rabindranath about absence of Muslim themes in his works, it turned out
to be less than informed. I was helped by my Shetubondhon friends, Dr. Kaushik
Sen and Mr. Khorshed Alam, to become better informed. I wanted to be more
informed, but didn't quite have the opportunity.
Shetubondhon (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Shetubondhon)
has been more than an internet forum for me. I can't speak for others, but at
least I have truly made some friends. One such respected friend, recently took
the initiative to send me a copy of Rabindranath's novel "Gora". I haven't
read it before. Indeed, more than twenty years ago when I came to the U.S. the
only novel of Rabindranath I read - as I recollect - was "Shesher Kobita". I
guess I had greater interest in him as a poet than anything else and, to be
candid, Sharatchandra's novels touched me much deeper than Rabindranath's.
Yet, I thought I was quite familiar with Rabindranath. Well, after a
"careful" reading of GORA, I can't but acknowledge that my assessment about
myself needs upgrading.
My reading of GORA did not change my so-far-held understanding that
Rabindranath did not draw on Islamic/Muslim theme or symbolism, or none of his
works had a Muslim as the main character [Note: This statement of mine turned
out to be only partially correct, after I discovered his short story "Musalmanir
Galpo", a must reading for all], even though Muslims are integrally
related to Bharatborsho and more than half of Bengal. But the reading of GORA
did contribute toward my appreciation of his understanding and respect of
Islam and Muslims. Indeed, in one case, his articulation is most profoundly
relevant toward understanding Islam and Muhammad (s), where he specifically
mentions about Muhammad (s).
The novel relates to the odyssey of a young man Gora from the narrowness of
the institutionalized religion he believed in to disillusionment and
enlightenment as a HUMAN BEING. In several contexts there are references to
Islam/Muslims that are worth noting. My particular interest in this stems from
the fact not just because those comments relate to Islam, rather those deeply
reflect a noble heart that desired to enhance and enrich our growth as HUMAN
BEINGS, without which religions, societies, customs, ideologies - so-called
progressive or reactionary - can become a terrible bondage. In his writing
there is no disrespect or denial of religion in general, but a profound
protest against what people themselves often make out religions to be.
Appreciation of an essential Islamic spirit
One of the major stumbling blocks in understanding Islam is its categorical
and fundamental emphasis on equality and justice, not just from philosophical
or moral, but also human action viewpoint. Inspiring and educating its
adherents to stand up for non-partisan justice, even against improbable odds,
is a key to understanding Islam. When I talk about understanding, I include
understanding by Muslims as well. When the Qur'an makes the clarion call: "And
why should ye not fight in the cause of Allah and of those who, being weak,
are ill-treated (and oppressed)?- Men, women, and children, whose cry is:
"Our Lord! Rescue us from this town, whose people are oppressors; and raise
for us from thee one who will protect; and raise for us from thee one who will
help!" [4/an-Nisa/75], it was not meant for merely standing up for Muslims,
but for anyone who is oppressed and victim of injustice. In understanding
Islam from the perspective of humanity, it is important to recognize that
Muslims are meant to be a group of people bound by not territory, language,
race or status, but by a set of beliefs, principles and vision at the core of
which is: "Ye are the best of peoples, evolved for mankind, enjoining what
is right, forbidding what is wrong, and believing in God." [3/ale Imran/110]
How unfortunate that even Muslims have forgotten it so badly and have
become a self-centered community.
Similarly, Islam's call for non-partisan justice is universal and categorical.
"O ye who believe! stand out firmly for justice, as witnesses to Allah,
even as against YOURSELVES, or your parents, or your kin, and whether it be
(against) rich or poor: for Allah can best protect both. Follow not the lusts
(of your hearts), lest ye swerve, and if ye distort (justice) or decline to do
justice, verily Allah is well-acquainted with all that ye do." [4/an-Nisa/135]
Once again, unfortunately, Muslims themselves have forgotten this principle.
The above articulation is important to understand the following, relevant part
of Gora's odyssey.
When Gora left his home to be away from his abode and see the world a little bit,
he came to a village during his travel, which happened to be a
Muslim-predominant neighborhood, the only one in that area. There he found
only one Hindu family, a barber, who also take care of a Muslim boy. This
neighborhood is in trouble because it is the only neighborhood that has not
submitted to the unjust impositions of the Sahibs. "All other subjects have
yielded, except the ones of this Char-Ghoshpur, whom the Sahibs haven't been
able to subdue. All the subjects of this area are Muslims and their chief,
Foru Sardar is afraid of nobody." The barber humbly shared with Gora:
"Desire to stand up against those who are powerful seemed to him extreme
stubbornness and foolishness of Muslims." [pp. 185-187]
Underlying this statement is a truth about the general spirit of Muslims, though it often has become either rare or adulterated with other undesirable, extraneous factors or devious/crude/reactionary tendencies among some Muslims. Gora's enlightenment about the human factor in dealing with society/religion that put unjust customs above humanity is inspiring. Sympathizing with the victims of injustice, this young Hindu reflects: "What kind of monstrous irreligiosity we are upholding in Bharatborsho by turning purity into an external object. My caste would be saved in the home of those who are persecuting Muslims, and it would be lost in the home of that person who is willing to endure hardship, danger and alienation to save a Muslim child! Whatever is the goodness of such rules and customs, I will think about it later, not now." [p. 188]
A rare understanding of Islam and Muhammad (s)
Gora, while a fanatic Hindu, has a heart that at rare moments shows pristine human feeling. An old Muslim man carrying a basket of vegetable, fruit, egg and bread was pushed over by a coach carrying an upper class gentleman. The life of the old man was saved, but not what he was carrying in the basket. The angry gentleman screamed at him "Damn swine" (in Bengali, shuor) and thrashed his whip that left a mark of blood on the old man's face. The old man simply sighed "Allah" and started to pick up all those scattered remains in the basked. Gora joined the old man to help him recover those items that were usable.
"The Muslim carrier felt hesitant at the gracious conduct of this gentleman stranger, and said to him: "Why are you going through all this trouble - all these are destroyed." Gora realized the futility of it ... that one gentleman has unjustly treated a person and another gentleman is trying to bring a balance by being at the same level of that person ... it is difficult to understand by a street person. Once the basket was filled, Gora told him: "You won't be able to afford your loss. Let's go to our house and I will purchase the whole thing. But, let me tell you something - that you put up with your humiliation without saying a word, Allah will not forgive you for this."
The Muslim said, "Allah will punish the wrongdoer; why me?"
Gora said: "One who tolerates wrong is also blameworthy. Because he facilitates wrongdoing in this world. You won't understand me, but remember that religion is not merely being good-natured, pleasant, humble, meek gentleman (bhalo-manushi). It simply emboldens the bad ones. Your Muhammad had understanding of this and that's why he did not propagate the faith merely as pleasant and meek gentleman (bhalomanush)". [pp. 111-112]
It
reminds me of Rabindranath's rhyme:
Onnay je kore ar onnay je shohe
Tabo ghrina jeno tare trinoshomo dohe.
There is a great deal of understanding behind this articulation. A lot of people misunderstand Muhammad (s) because when they compare Muhammad (s) with some other religious figureheads, such as Jesus and Buddha, many find a stark and intriguing contrast. Jesus (peace be upon him), as portrayed in Bible, appears to be an embodiment of unblemished peace and compassion. Buddha appears to be an enlightened soul, far removed from the hustle and bustle of life. In both cases, it seems that many find a message of non-violence. On the contrary, Muhammad (s) appears to be quite different. In the limelight of society, he is helping the feuding Arabs to make peace during his youth. He is an accomplished merchant, a family man, forgiving all the adversaries during the conquest of Makkah except four murderers, mending his own shoes, foot-racing his beloved wife, leading and motivating the believers to stand for justice and give life in fighting, if necessary. [By the way, some time ago at the request of someone whom I respect very much I put together a one-page introduction to the life of the Prophet. If interested, please find the document at Muhammad (s): His Life and Teachings in ONE-PAGE. Also, you might like to read another pertinent article, Toward Understanding Muhammad: Some Issues in Peace and Violence.
Since there is so much misunderstanding in this regard, I would like to take this opportunity to produce some additional pertinent contents. One of the leading contemporary scholars of Islam, Sayyed Hossein Nasr wrote in his book Ideals and Realities of Islam, a most highly recommended book:
"It is difficult for a non-Muslim to understand the spiritual significance of the Prophet and his role as the prototype of the religious and spiritual life, especially if one comes from a Christian background. Compared to Christ, or to the Buddha for that matter, the earthly career of the Prophet seems often too human and too engrossed in the vicissitudes of social, economic and political activity to serve as a model for the spiritual life. That is why so many people who write today of the great spiritual guides of humanity are not able to understand and interpret him sympathetically. It is easier to see the spiritual radiance of Christ or even medieval saints, Christian or Muslims, than that of the Prophet, although the Prophet is the supreme saint in Islam without whom there would have been no sanctity whatsoever.
The reason for this difficulty is that the spiritual nature of the Prophet is veiled in his human one and his purely spiritual function is hidden in his duties as the guide of men and the leader of a community. It was the function of the Prophet to be not only a spiritual guide, but also the organizer of a new social order with all that such a function implies. And it is precisely this aspect of his being that veils his purely spiritual dimension from foreign eyes. Outsiders have understood his political genius, his power of oratory, his great statesmanship, but few have understood how he could be the religious and spiritual guide of men and how his life could be emulated by those who aspire to sanctity. This is particularly true in the modern world in which religion is separated from other domains of life and most modern men can hardly imagine how a spiritual being could also be immersed in the most intense political and social activity.
Actually if the contour of the personality of the Prophet is to be understood he should not be compared to Christ or Buddha whose message was meant primarily for saintly men and who founded a community based on monastic life which later became the norm of a whole society. Rather, because of his dual function as 'king' and 'prophet', as the guide of men in this world and the hereafter, the Prophet should be compared to the prophet-kings of the Old Testament, to David and Solomon, and especially to Abraham himself. Or, to cite once again an example outside the Abrahamic tradition, the spiritual type of the Prophet should be compared in Hinduism, to Rama and Krishna, who although in a completely different traditional climate, were avataras and at the same time kings and householders, who participated in social life with all that such activity implies as recorded in the Mahabharata and the Ramayana.
This type of figure who is at once a spiritual being and a leader of men has always been, relatively speaking, rare in the Christian West, especially in modern times. Political life has become so divorced from spiritual principles that to many people such a function itself appears as an impossibility in proof of which Westerners often point to the purely spiritual life of Christ who said, 'My Kingdom is not of this world.' And even historically the Occident has not witnessed many figures of this type unless one considers the Templars and in another context such devout kings as Charlemagne and St. Louis. The figure of the Prophet is thus difficult for many Occidentals to understand and this misconception to which often bad intention has been added is responsible for the nearly total ignorance of his spiritual nature in most works written about him in Western languages of which the number is legion. One could in fact say that of the major elements of Islam the real significance of the Prophet is the least understood to non-Muslims and especially to Occidentals.
The Prophet did participate in social life in its fullest sense. He married, had a household, was a father and moreover he was ruler and judge and had also to fight many wars in which he underwent painful ordeals. He had to undergo many hardships and experience all the difficulties which human life, especially that of the founder of a new state and society, implies. But within all these activities his heart rested in contentment with the Divine, and he continued inwardly to repose in the Divine Peace. In fact his participation in social and political life was precisely to integrate this domain into a spiritual centre. ...
The Prophet has also often been criticized by modern Western authors for being cruel and for having treated men harshly. Such a charge is again absurd because critics of this kind have forgotten that either a religion leaves the world aside, as Christ did, or integrates the world, in which case it must deal with such questions as war, retribution and justice, etc." [pp. 68-71]
Thus, the empathic understanding of Rabindranath of Islam and the Prophet as shown in Gora is altogether remarkable. While the writer is trying to seek improvement in the society to which he feels a special attachment, not only that he is not denigrating the second most important community of India, but also he is helping to understand and develop respect toward that community. Of course, non-Hindus need to have better knowledge and understanding about the Hindu society too. Such literary works give some special vantage point and deeper look into the Indian/Hindu society. I hope to write on some of those aspects in future.
One day it might not be fair to call
India "Hindustan"
Another recognition of a fundamental fact about Islam (parallel to another religion) in Gora is: "The gateway to Islam is open to all people; Christian society is also inviting all." [ p. 444]
Explaining through one of the main, exemplary characters in Gora, Rabindranath made a profound observation.
Paresh said (to his enlightened, but concerned daughter, Shuchorita): "It takes time for the rot of the society to reveal. In the past the door to Hindu society was open. During that time the non-Aryans of this land prided themselves to be part of the Hindu society. Even during the Muslim rules almost everywhere in the country Hindu kings and Zaminders had great power and authority, and therefore there was no limit to rules or barriers against people exiting so easily from the society. Now, by the rights promulgated by the English everyone is protected by law. There is no artificial way to barricade the door. No wonder we are observing for some period of time that in India Hindus are declining in numbers and Muslims are increasing. If it continues, gradually this land will be a Muslim-predominant country. To call it Hindustan then would be unfair."
Shuchorita asked with sadness: "Father, is it not the duty of all of us to prevent this? Shall we accentuate the decline of this Hindu society by abandoning it? Is it not the most apt time to hold onto it ardently?"
Pareshbabu said in deep affection: "Can we save someone just because we wish so? There is a natural law for survival - anyone who violates that innate law, others abandon him naturally. Hindu society debases and abandons human being. That's why day by day it is becoming increasingly difficult for her to defend herself. She can't hide herself any longer. All the roads in so many directions have opened up around the world. People are traversing from all directions. She can't keep herself isolated by building walls made of scriptures and customs. If the Hindu society does not collect itself together and abates the cancer, the interaction with the people from outside will be a severe blow to her." [pp. 444-445]
Some concluding observations
1. The prognosis about India becoming a Muslim-predominant society has proved to be less than tenable. Yes, Islam has that pristine power. But even in Muslim societies today human beings are degraded as human beings; rules and customs have overwhelmed the human identity and spirit, walls and fences have become the weapon of defense, defying the early society established by the Prophet, where people were attracted to Islam and the Islamic society from various backgrounds and regions, as far as Persia (Salman Farsi), Rome (Shuyaeb Rumi) and Abyssinia (Bilal Habshi), to seek peace, freedom and dignity as human beings.
2. My comments about Rabindranath's observations are not merely in the context of Islam and Muslims, but I am genuinely moved by his ability to rise above the parochialism and try to push the existing society toward setting/embracing higher standard for human dignity.
3. The best and most effective critics of a society are from within. Thus, the incisive evaluation of Hindu society by people like Sharatchandra and Rabindranath are more valuable than those who criticize Hindu society from outside. Those who critic because of love and empathy are different and their impact would also be different. It is no wonder that in Rabindranath's works there is pithy criticism against Hindu society, but also at the same time against the Bramho society. His criticisms are not merely to gratify his arrogance and thirst for self-aggrandizement. Rather it is with a deep sense of empathy, objectivity and balance. Similarly, all those who, as open adversaries, criticize Islam and Muslim society, they may gratify their thirst to criticize, but they won't have much impact without understanding and empathy toward what they criticize. They would succeed in greater alienation, mutual antagonism, and bridge-burning. We have plenty of masters of bridge-burners and hate-mongers; we need a generation dedicated to bridge-building.
"You can criticize from outside, but if you want to judge, then you have to enter inside." [p. 290]
4. Earlier on a different forum I mentioned about our own homework. People indiscriminately and rampantly criticizing whatever they don't like without even the least effort to understand the other side and without recognizing the shortcomings they themselves have. Hindus criticizing non-Hindus, Muslims criticizing non-Muslims, secularists criticizing religionists and vice versa. Most of these groups are generally oblivious to their own problems and shortcomings. We need to revive the motto of self-scrutiny. My vigilance about my own errors and shortcomings should be at least as much as I am vigilant about others. That goes for all. What I observed in this work of Rabindranath is a glimpse of that empathy and self-scrutiny.
5. Ingredients of a great deal of bridge-building works, especially in the context of the subcontinent, are there. Unfortunately, little have been done to nurture those seeds that were already planted. In the case of Rabindranath, both Rabindra-haters and Rabindra-lovers, Muslims and Hindus, religionists and secularists, religious fundamentalists and secular fundamentalists, so called progressives and reactionaries are often equally responsible for not helping these seeds germinate.
Those of you who might not have read yet, it might be worthwhile to read my crude/draft translation of Nazrul's Gorami Dharmo Noy at [http://www.nazrul.org/nazrul_works/farooq_trans/t_naz_fanaticism.htm]
To my Shetubondhon friend who sent me this precious gift, THANK YOU!
References:
HOME
Index of my
writings
Have you visited my site on Kazi
Nazrul Islam?
Genocide
1971 Page?
Hadith
Humor Page?