Opinion

Sonu Nigam is right – blaring azaan is ‘forced religiousness’. And it doesn’t stop there

‘I’'m not a Muslim and I have to be woken up by the azaan in the morning,’ the singer tweeted. ‘When will this forced religiousness end in India.’

Another day, another Twitter outrage. This time it was Bollywood singer Sonu Nigam who took to the social media network to broadcast his distaste of loud calls to prayer from a nearby mosque, calling it a form of “gundagardi”, gangsterism.

Nigam’s point is correct. In their azaans or calls to prayer, mosques across India often violate sound pollution norms in what has become a sonic arms race. This is nothing new. Fifteenth century Braj poet Kabir asked why the mullah needed to shout out from the tops of mosques. Was God deaf?

Power structure

However, there is a difference in context when it comes to Nigam and Kabir. Modern India is moving towards what could only be described as religious majoritarianism. The way power is structured in modern India, it is relatively easy to pick on minorities using objective laws and principles – even while making sure the same laws and principles are mostly never applied to the majority.

So while Nigam’s point is valid in itself, it is also a rather trivial example of “forced religiousness” in the context of modern India. Taking up public airwaves and road space is an almost banal part of living in India. This includes azaans, pandals on the roads in Durga Pujo and Ganesh utsav, air pollution during Diwali and night-long bhajans during Delhi’s jagratas (which ironically Nigam has sung in). If one were to be picky, these are all examples of “forced religiousness”.

But here’s another example of “forced religiousness”: India’s beef laws. Driven by Hindu religious sentiment, a number of Indian states penalise cow slaughter. While both cow slaughter laws and azaans results in the imposition of religious practises on the unwilling, the scale at which they operate differs hugely. Over the past two years, six Muslims have been murdered by religiously-inspired cow protection gangs. Moreover, cow slaughter laws end up harming bovine-related industries such as dairy, leather and meat. In fact, in states which have harsh cow slaughter laws and extreme sentiment around the gau mata, cow population levels have dropped. Moreover, “forced religiousness” around Hindu food taboos means cheap sources of nutritious food are denied to poor Indian – even if the country suffers from a debilitating malnutrition problem.

So while an obnoxiously loud azaan might break your sleep but beef laws have ended up encouraging murder and economic dislocation across India. Both are examples of “forced religiousness” but the way power flows in India means that while sound pollution laws regulate the former, the state itself passes cow slaughter laws.

Bullying the weak

This sort of dissonance, in applying the same principle depending on the distribution of power, is ubiquitous in India. For example, while almost all of India’s industries operate in an informal grey zone, it is only the Muslim-dominated meat industry that was targeted for compliance by the new Bharatiya Janata Party government in Uttar Pradesh. The so-called Haj Subsidy – which isn’t even a subsidy – was ordered to be completely removed by the Supreme Court, even as public money is provided for Hindu religious pilgrimages.

Similarly, while politicians are debarred by law from asking for votes in the name of religion – this rule doesn’t apply to Hinduism. Politicians can campaign in the name of Hinduism since the Supreme Court itself held that Hindutva is a “way of life of the people in the subcontinent”. Moreover, the court held that even asking for a “Hindu rashtra” – Hindu nation – was fine and did not fall foul of secularism.

The biased application of laws and principles is the main feature of majoritarianism. The line between democracy and majoritarianism is a thin one. Both depend on brute popularity to validate the state, the difference being that democracy recognises basic rights. India, though, seems to be faltering on its practise of democracy and moving rapidly towards majoritarianism. So while minor instances of “forced religiousness” such as azaans become issues which the state cracks down on – the Bombay High court has banned loudspeakers in mosques – the same principle is flouted by the state itself in major instances such as beef laws and in the conduct of elections.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Scroll+ here. We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.
Sponsored Content BY 

Tracing the formation of Al Qaeda and its path to 9/11

A new show looks at some of the crucial moments leading up to the attack.

“The end of the world war had bought America victory but not security” - this quote from Lawrence Wright’s Pulitzer-Prize winning book, ‘The Looming Tower’, gives a sense of the growing threat to America from Al Qaeda and the series of events that led to 9/11. Based on extensive interviews, including with Bin Laden’s best friend in college and the former White House counterterrorism chief, ‘The Looming Tower’ provides an intimate perspective of the 9/11 attack.

Lawrence Wright chronicles the formative years of Al Qaeda, giving an insight in to Bin Laden’s war against America. The book covers in detail, the radicalisation of Osama Bin Laden and his association with Ayman Al Zawahri, an Egyptian doctor who preached that only violence could change history. In an interview with Amazon, Wright shared, “I talked to 600-something people, but many of those people I talked to again and again for a period of five years, some of them dozens of times.” Wright’s book was selected by TIME as one of the all-time 100 best nonfiction books for its “thoroughly researched and incisively written” account of the road to 9/11 and is considered an essential read for understanding Islam’s war on the West as it developed in the Middle East.

‘The Looming Tower’ also dwells on the response of key US officials to the rising Al Qaeda threat, particularly exploring the turf wars between the FBI and the CIA. This has now been dramatized in a 10-part mini-series of the same name. Adapted by Dan Futterman (of Foxcatcher fame), the series mainly focuses on the hostilities between the FBI and the CIA. Some major characters are based on real people - such as John O’ Neill (FBI’s foul-mouthed counterterrorism chief played by Jeff Daniels) and Ali Soufan (O’ Neill’s Arabic-speaking mentee who successfully interrogated captured Islamic terrorists after 9/11, played by Tahar Rahim). Some are composite characters, such as Martin Schmidt (O’Neill’s CIA counterpart, played by Peter Sarsgaard).

The series, most crucially, captures just how close US intelligence agencies had come to foiling Al Qaeda’s plans, just to come up short due to internal turf wars. It follows the FBI and the CIA as they independently follow intelligence leads in the crises leading up to 9/11 – the US Embassy bombings in East Africa and the attack on US warship USS Cole in Yemen – but fail to update each other. The most glaring example is of how the CIA withheld critical information – Al Qaeda operatives being hunted by the FBI had entered the United States - under the misguided notion that the CIA was the only government agency authorised to deal with terrorism threats.

The depth of information in the book has translated into a realistic recreation of the pre-9/11 years on screen. The drama is even interspersed with actual footage from the 9/11 conspiracy, attack and the 2004 Commission Hearing, linking together the myriad developments leading up to 9/11 with chilling hindsight. Watch the trailer of this gripping show below.

Play

The Looming Tower is available for streaming on Amazon Prime Video, along with a host of Amazon originals and popular movies and TV shows. To enjoy unlimited ad free streaming anytime, anywhere, subscribe to Amazon Prime Video.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of Amazon Prime Video and not by the Scroll editorial team.