Toward a Marxists-Muslims Dialog - Part IV

From our past experience

I have a personal story to share. In 1979, while a student of the University of Dhaka, I was a participant in the National TV Debate Championship as a part of the Salimullah Muslim Hall. It just happened that the team to represent S.M. Hall that was selected through a competitive process consisted of a rather interesting combination of individuals. There was one who was ideologically nonentity, myself from an Islamic background, and the team leader, a central leader of Bangladesh Chhatra Union (currently, a faculty with the Department of Economics at the
University of Dhaka).

As we began to prepare for our first scheduled event, soon it was apparent that our team leader was bringing in his ideological framework explicitly into the debate presentation itself. This also provoked me to bring in my ideological bias into debate, causing us to struggle for the lack of
synergy and coherence that is so essential for a TEAM. After a few futile attempts I suggested to the team, and particularly the team leader, that this debate competition is not and should not be treated as a part of an ideological battleground. Therefore, instead of trying to analyze every
thing from our "own" ideological background, let's examine the topic and explore what might be an "winning" approach or line of argument.

With some hesitation, ultimately we were a TEAM focused not on trying to use arguments based on "superior" ideology, but on arguments that might be superior in that particular context. Guess what? It worked. The S.M. Hall won the national championship that year. For me it was more than winning the competition; it left a lasting impression on my mind regarding the "winning" approach. Too often we use our ideological/religious background ineffectively, inefficiently or inappropriately where neither the ideology/religion nor the adherents/faithfuls are positively served. Streamlining our culture away from our focus on differences to commonalities provides the valuable foundation for positive dynamics. [Note: Seeking common ground does not mean
eliminating all the differences, as that would neither be natural nor practical. Certain differences
as well certain amount of differences are ESSENTIAL to our positive dynamics.]

Since then I have TRIED (not necessarily always succeeded) to emphasize common grounds (at least as the starting point) than the differences. Remember cooperation, synergy, teamwork has more to do with common ground. Respect, tolerance, fellow-feeling also goes more with common grounds. Once we start from differences and tend to emphasize differences, then all differences can be elevated to IRREDUCIBLE level. Once we take that route, there won't be anything
common between me and everyone else.

Am I talking about something utopian? No. First, as a Muslim this should be the modus operandi of Muslims. Just look at the life of the Prophet Muhammad (s) the way he saved the Arab tribes from begin another intercenine war on the issue of who would reposition the Hajre Aswad, the Black Stone in Ka'ba, during its reconstruction. Little bit of care and ingenuity in bringing people together avoided an impending bloodshed.

But some might say that those are "lofty" examples of people who are considered prophets. How can we practically follow their examples? Well, let me give a more down to earth example from within the domain of our language and land. Also, this time I would like to give an example from
the sides of the Marxists that there are people to whom seeking common ground was so natural.

I don't how many of you know about Comrade Muzaffar Ahmed (1989-1973). He was a well-known leftist figure of Bengal (originally from Sandeep, Bangladesh). He was one of the founders in Communist Movement in India. He was among many other Marxists who, in adherence to their ideology, did not seek to emphasize or accentuate differences.

Who was among the main founders of Bongio MUSSALMAN Shahitto Shomiti? It was comrade Muzaffar Ahmad and he patronized it all along his life, even when the stewardship of the association changed that was unwilling to recognize comrade Muzaffar's initial contribution. Many a non-communists, including the Rebel one, Kazi Nazrul Islam received valuable, critical and unreserved support and patronage. Nazrul received such patronage and affection from the comrade not just when he was writing "Bidrohi", "Shammyobadi" or "Shayma Sangeet." The comrades patronage and affection were unabated when Nazrul was writing Hamd/Naat or Islamic poems.

It wasn't that comrade Muzaffar was a very resourceful person. But he definitely was in Iqbal's term a great Mumin-in-heart, where the suffering the less fortunate ones used to play the most melancholy tune. Many different voices came together in that chorus to serve humanity, not in
conflict but in unison, whenever and wherever possible.

In one of his articles, Nazrul wrote elaborately which is at the same time a defense of the comrade as well as tribute to him. My eyes become full of tears when I see the CEO of Gonobani, Muzaffar Ahmed. ... The condition of his body is deplorable. He is a walking symbol of protesting humanity. I swear if, seeing Muzaffar, one's dry eyes don't become wet. Such as selfless,
unassuming, quiet worker, such a wonderful heart, such a saintly vision, a shining talent ... Many Muslim leaders have cashed in during this fad of communal environment, many of whom don't deserve even to be disciple at his feet; only Muzaffar is virtually starving to death. ... Even Tom-Dick-Harry (Budhdhu Mian) is a leader, while Muzaffar is dying from vomiting blood. Yet, I have not seen a soul to love this Bharat-borsho, this nation, so wholeheartedly - let alone any Muslim leader, not even Hindu leaders." You can read the full excerpt at
(http://www.globalfront.com/nazrul/nazrul_works/articles/muzaffar.htm).

This dedicated comrade enjoyed relationship all others who either ideologically or heartwise were close to him. Based on the information comrade Muzaffar had, when he came to know about the hasty decision of Nazrul to get married in Comilla, he tried to dissuade Nazrul from the trap of his cunning, future father-in-law Ali Akbar Khan. Being a Marxist/Comrade was not a problem for him to write a letter to Nazrul like this: "I have not received any letter from you recently. From the letter sent to Wajed Mian, I learnt that your wedding is set for 3rd Ashar. ... There is very little time
...
Therefore, it doesn't seem that I would be able to make it. ... However, let everything go well, I OFFER THIS PRAYER TO KHODAR DARGAHE." [Gupta, p. 54]

Indeed, the inspiring and selfless role he has played for the exploited working poor of our society remains exemplary for all - most Muslims as well as most Marxists of today.

I offer the above information with the hope that we always can find ways to build-bridges or to bridge gaps whenever we have desire for it. I can't say that most Muslims understand the importance of this attitude and approach in this way (even though, it definitely is rooted in the Qur'an and the Prophetic legacy), but on the other hand, the Marxists, who claim to be superior from intellectual or scientific point of view, I am afraid that I don't see them much differently in this respect either.

It is my hope and desire that a different future can be charted, if we are all willing.

References:

Stanley Aronowitz, The Crisis in Historical Materialism: Class, Politics and Culture in Marxist Theory (Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 1991, 2nd ed.)

Dr. Sushilkumar Gupta, Nazrul Choritmanosh (Calcutta: Dej Publishing, 1988)

Marx-Engels Archive (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1837-pre/1835-ref.htm )

Ali Shariati, Marxism and Other Western Fallacies: An Islamic Critique (Berkeley, CA: Mizan Press, 1980)

Robert Tucker, The Marx-Engels Reader (Norton, 2nd Edition, 1978).

[... continued in Conclusion - Part V]