MUHAMMAD AHSEEM

One of the larger realities of Kashmir is that it has not been able to separate politics from faith. In the tyrannical rules of Chaks and Dogras, the local politics was never permitted to become an institution of public life. The clergy, however, remained as a vital institution sometimes roped in for political decision-making by the kings.

Later, in the last century when politics emerged as a powerful institution, that Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah led, it still required religion on his side. That is perhaps why he would increasingly recite Quran in public meetings and use building of a concrete-and-mortar Hazratbal as his contribution towards faith. From the days when it refused to pray in the Pathar Masjid after the Mughal Queen made certain uncharitable remarks about the mosque she built, to the massive deadly protests over Salman Rushdie’s controversial novel, Kashmir has always registered its reaction to events that were associated with the issue of faith. In this backdrop, public reaction to the destruction of the shrine at Khanyar is somehow understandable. But what defies the traditional logic is that off-late the ‘faithful’ are growing as parasites of the system.

If there is a damage to a prayer place, it is not always the government that is responsible. From Khanqah-e-Faiz Panah in Tral to the shrine at Baba Reshi and now at Khanyar, rebuilding of shrines is being seen by the powers that be as responsibility of the state government. Why should not the people build the shrines or the mosques themselves? Why should a state government invest in the religious places?  Over the years, it has become a routine for the policy makers to spare some amounts of money that goes into the repairs, renovations and even outright construction of the religious places. They act wisely by offering a bit to all faiths.

It is mostly being done in the name of beautification, conservation and creating tourist infrastructure. At a time when even the apex court has asked the central government to stop subsidising the yearly Haj pilgrimage, the policy makers in the state find it easy to service faith with public kitty. The sel- proclaimed custodians of the faith need to debate the issues of public kitty sponsoring the institutions of faith.

The only option to manage such capital intensive situations is to strengthen the Muslim Waqf Board. The more money it has, the better it can function as an architect and manager of the shrines and the mosques. Once people start contributing towards it, they will get the right to hold it accountable.  Every society has a very strong system to manage issues of faith and crisis.

Kashmir needs it more because it is gradually limping from a crisis that has immense costs attached. One of the recent revelations was about an orphanage that has 24 inmates on whom the business interests of 35 individuals rests. They are commission agents who manage resources for the orphanage against a cut. How can a society that has been contributing towards such causes permit it?

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here