SherAli Tareen’s new book Perilous Intimacies is a work of deep scholarship on the debates around the possibilities of Hindu-Muslim friendship. However, the framing of the book and its arguments appear to be stilted, its sample studies are greatly limited, and there is a sleight of hand executed in its title and endorsements by the author/editors/publisher that needs to be highlighted to concede the limits and flaws of the book. The subtitle of the book ‘Debating Hindu-Muslim Friendship After Empire’ is the main culprit and source of (intentional?) ambiguity and confusion that led to a sense of betrayal of expectations for this reader.
‘Traditionally educated Muslim scholars known as the ulama, imagined and contested the boundaries of Islam.’ Picture for representation purpose only. | Photo Credit: Getty Images/istock
At first appearance, the subtitle of the book seems to suggest that this may be a book that would investigate a comprehensive and diverse set of debates and opinions coming from different stakeholders. This impression is added to by one of the key endorsements by the esteemed professor Talal Asad, renowned scholar of the anthropology of secularism, religion and particularly Islam, who claims Tareen’s book is ‘a learned and thought-provoking contribution to the question of whether there can be a friendship between Hindu and Muslim communities in South Asia.’
Engraving of a scene at an Arab university | Photo Credit: Getty Images/istock
In complete contrast, Tareen opens his book by stating ‘this book explores the question of how South Asian Muslim scholars, especially traditionally educated Muslim scholars known as the ulama, imagined and contested the boundaries of Islam from the late eighteenth to the early twentieth centuries. It examines critical intra-Muslim debates over the limits of Hindu-Muslim relations and friendship.’ This stated aim should have resulted in the attachment of ‘Muslims’ at the beginning of the subtitle of the book, since it only examines Muslims debating friendships.
A candlelight vigil in memory of 52-year-old Muslim farmer Mohammad Akhlaq who was lynched by a mob in New Delhi, in 2015. Villagers allegedly beat Akhlaq to death and severely injured his son upon hearing rumours that the family was eating beef. | Photo Credit: AP
A lacuna
This sample itself continues to baffle, as it has a major lacuna in excluding all Shia ulama or scholars and their theological views as well as the strong political ties Shias have had in South Asia with other religious communities across the political spectrum. Moreover, the very fact that Tareen’s protagonists whose debates he gives us are limited to clerics elides the fact and so contravenes Asad’s stated endorsement of this book in that it does not actually examine the real possibility of Hindu-Muslim friendship in India but only its limited scholarly debates. Lived Islam (or Hinduism) cannot be ignored in the practice of friendship. For example, just before his lynching on accusations of consuming beef, the Muslim, Mohammad Akhlaq, called his childhood Hindu friend Manoj Sisodia to save his life when he was attacked by a mob, and Sisodia did his best to call the police and bring them to the site of the attack. Neither Akhlaq nor Sisodia would have consulted any ulama before these practical and ontological acts of friendship towards each other. Similarly, few lived friendships are performed or contested simply by scripture.
Rifts within
Tareen later adds and admits: ‘the ultimate objective of this book is to showcase and detail the depth and complexity as well as the fissures and contestations of Muslim scholarly traditions in South Asia.’ One wonders why only the case study of the book makes it to the title and not the actual motive. Many of the chapters simply work with readings of Muslim writers on their views of Hinduism, and actual chapters engaging with friendship are few. The book’s analysis of Muslim ulama’s self-fashioning since colonial intervention as Muslim through an excessive stress on the place of Islamic ritual to compensate their loss of political sovereignty may well be correct.
Yet, this makes the book’s objective one to understand Muslim self-conception largely from the Sunni clerical perspective, alongside the views of Maulana Azad (politician), Mirza Jan-i-Janan (Sufi), and Sir Sayyid (Westernised-reformist), eliding both Shia and other less-privileged lived-Islam views which make the bulk of South Asian Muslims. There is no examination of the lived experience, comprehensive Hindu and Muslim theologies, or even the political realities of friendship between Hindus and Muslims from a truly representative set of positions.
Perilous Intimacies: Debating Hindu-Muslim Friendship After Empire; SherAli Tareen, Permanent Black, ₹795.
The reviewer holds a PhD on the politics of friendship in E.M. Forster’s work. He teaches at Jindal Global University.
