शाहरुख से कुछ सवाल...

शाहरुख खान की फिल्म 'माई नेम इज खान' को लेकर जमकर हंगामा हो रहा है। एक तरफ घाघ राजनीतिज्ञ हैं तो दूसरी तरफ एक घाघ व्यापारी। शाहरुख ने जहां शुरू से ही इस फिल्म के प्रमोशन के लिए कोई कसर नहीं छोड़ी है वहीं शिवसैनिक भी अपनी खोई हुई 'विरासत' को इस जरिए ढूंढ़ निकालने में जुट गए हैं। दोनों ओर एक समानता है... जहां शाहरुख खान अपने शीर्ष पर पहुंच चुके हैं और अब उनका ढलान शुरू हुआ है वहीं शिवसेना इस मायने में उनसे दो कदम आगे है। कमाल की बात यह है कि दोनों ही इसे आम आदमी का नुकसान बता रहे हैं। जबकि नुकसान इनका व्यक्तिगत है।

करीब दो साल पहले तक शाहरुख खान का ध्यान सिर्फ फिल्मों के व्यापार की ओर था तब उनके प्रतिद्वंद्वी अमिताभ बच्चन, आमिर खान और सलमान खान हुआ करते थे। फिल्मों में यह प्रतिद्वंदिता आज भी है। तब उनके साथ भारत-पाकिस्तान जैसी समस्याएं जुड़ी हुई नहीं थी लेकिन उन्होंने जब क्रिकेट जैसे दूसरे व्यवसाय में हाथ डाला जहां भारत और पाकिस्तान मुख्य ध्रुव हैं तो ये समस्याएं शुरू हुईं।

गौर किया जाए तो उनकी हिंदू-मुस्लिम की चिंताओं से किसी को परेशानी नहीं है। परेशानी उनकी नजर में भारत, पाकिस्तान के आपसी सहयोग की जरूरत को लेकर है।

देश किसी सीमा या जगह का नाम नहीं होता। देश वहां के लोगों से बनता है। पाकिस्तान सिर्फ भारत और अफगानिस्तान के बीच का स्थल क्षेत्र नहीं है। वहां एक संस्कृति है, वहां उस संस्कृति को मानने वाले लोग हैं। इसलिए वह 'पाकिस्तान' है। पाकिस्तान के लोगों को आज वही काटना पड़ रहा है जो उन्होंने कभी बोया था।

उम्मीदें आज भी कायम हैं, पाकिस्तान की जनता अपनी दुनियाविरोधी राजनीतिक व्यवस्था को बदले तो पूरी दुनिया उनका साथ देगी। उन्हें किसी 'शाहरुख खान' या 'जावेद मियांदाद' की जरूरत नहीं पड़ेगी।

इतिहास गवाह रहा है कि जब भी लोगों ने खुद निर्णय लेकर ऐसे क्रांतिकारी कदम उठाए हैं तो पूरी दुनिया ने उनका साथ दिया है।

जबतक वे लोग ऐसा नहीं करेंगे तब तक शाहरुख खान, जावेद मियांदाद और शिवसेना जैसे लोग इसका फायदा उठाएंगे।

न जाने कहां से बंद्योपाध्याय अरिंदम ने कुछ सवाल शाहरुख खान से पूछे हैं, शाहरुख चाहें तो जवाब दे सकते हैं...

---धर्मेंद्र कुमार

Dear Shahrukh, your name is a household phenomenon in Indian and even beyond its borders. Your fame has put you in the Newsweek "most powerful people list" recently. However, as you may recall from your recent experience in New Jersey Airport, real life is a little different- it does not always follow the path predicted by a scriptwriter or director.

Of late, we have been reading about your opinions and statements on matters beyond the celluloid world. Nothing is wrong in it. You live in a free, democratic country and are entirely entitled to your opinion. But as a common man, also from the same soil, I think I have the right too to raise a few points that may not conform to your views of the real world.

I hope you will read it out.

When recently, the Pakistani players were not selected for the IPL, you said on a TV channel that Pakistan is a great neighbor to have. We (India and Pakistan) are great neighbors. They are good neighbours."

I have a few words to say about those statements.

One may recall your effort to clarify the Pakistani team captain, Shoaib Malik"s apology to the Muslims, living all over the world, for failing to win the final Twenty-20 match against India, likely much to the embarrassment of a lot of Indian Muslims, as expressed by Shamin Bano, mother of the man of the match, Irfan Pathan. What was more embarrassing was your effort to try to defend Shoaib in a subsequent interview, "I don"t think he meant to segregate Muslims and Christians and Hindus and say this was a match between Islam and Hinduism. I don"t think that..."

I doubt whether Shoaib talked to you personally about his thought process at that time. You did not really have to respond for somebody else but perhaps you could not resist the temptation to show your brotherhood and solidarity.

This reminds us again of Dr. Ambedkar"s observation that, "The brotherhood of Islam is not the universal brotherhood of man. It is brotherhood of Muslims for Muslims only."

Partition of India was what Pakistan wanted and got. It was painful to millions but many more millions in present India have been spared. Since then Pakistan has offered us only hatred. It has imposed on us three major wars, the Kargil insurgency, the Kashmir conflict, the series of serial blasts, the routine violation of border ceasefires, attacks on the Parliament House and the recent Mumbai 26/11attack.

Did you have these in mind when you talked about them being good neighbors?

In another interview, you had tried to explain the concept of Islamic Jihad. "I think one needs to understand the meaning of jihad... I’ve understood the essence that jihad is not about killing other people; jihad is about killing the badness in you."

May be you understand jihad better and deeper than the superficial meaning of what we, the rest of the mortal mankind, overburdened and terrorized by the inter-religious, intra-religious and sectarian violence that is plaguing the world in the name of Islam today, do. For we, the less educated, cannot really make a difference between Jihad and Qatl, between Jihad by heart/soul, Jihad by pen and Jihad by sword or between lesser and greater jihad.

We wonder, whatever its meaning may be, does it minimize the significance of the mindless killings that we see today in the name of Islam, across borders, all over the world? Does it change the nature of the killers whether you call them holy warriors, mujahidins, fedayeens or plane suicide bombers?

We agree with you that terrorism has no religion. But hopefully you will also agree with the people who perceive that most terrorist in the world today happen to believe in the scriptures of Islam.

They actually believe that they themselves are the true Islamists.

The "Moderate" Islamist, perhaps does not want to contradict them or may be does not dare to speak out against them. You have probably not forgotten the FIR against you for listing Prophet Mohammed as one of the most unimpressive personalities in history, the threats from which you had to skilfully wriggle out. Others who are not so fortunate, famous or flexible are suffering lifetime, as Tasleema Nasreen or Salman Rushdie would testify. For blasphemy in Islam is punishable with death, even for a believer.

Do I have to spell out the fate if it is a non-believer?

It is due to the inherent intolerance and exclusivity of Islam itself despite your effort to convince us that there is an Islam from Allah and very unfortunately, there is an Islam from the Mullahs.

Here is an historical insight from writer Irfan Hussain, "The Muslim heroes who figure larger than life in our history books committed some dreadful crimes... all have blood-stained hands that the passage of years has not cleansed. Indeed, the presence of Muslim historians on their various campaigns has ensured that the memory of their deeds will live long after they were buried... Seen through Hindu eyes, the Muslim invasion of their homeland was an unmitigated disaster."

So why should the "non-believers" care to accept them? Why should the majority of Indians like to welcome back such disasters again?

Since partition, India has come a long way in progress and development to her current status and is projected as an economic superpower in coming decades while Pakistan is perceived as a failed state on the verge of disintegration.

What does India have to gain by offering neighborly friendship to such a hostile and failed state?

India has never been an invader and is not in conflict of any other Muslim country. None of the wars and conflicts with Pakistan was instigated by India. In the current geo-political situation, one can argue for the Muslim world’s grudge and anger against Israel or the West and USA but one fail to fathom why India should also be at the receiving end and why Indians should be the second largest group of people to die from terrorists attacks. Indian majorities do not have anything to do with the Danish cartoon or the death of Saddam Hussain; so why should they suffer from Islamic havoc on those occasions.

In almost all occasions of terrorism, questions are raised about possible role of Pakistan, its terror bases and its terrorist organizations, as either directly or indirectly involved. Be it state sponsored (as recently admitted by President Zardari) or by non-state actors, Pakistan or Pakistani born are prime suspect in terrorist activities all over the world. ISI has been accused of playing a role in major terrorist attacks including 9/11 in the USA, terrorism in Kashmir, Mumbai Train Bombings, London Bombings, Indian Parliament Attack, Varanasi bombings, Hyderabad bombings, Mumbai terror attacks or the attack on the Indian embassy in Kabul.

Do you believe these are marks of a good neighbor? Then what is the reason for your preaching of immense love towards Pakistan?

Perhaps, as you said, because it is your ancestor’s homeland, you have a soft feeling for Pakistan and cannot see the difference. On the eve of accepting an honorary doctorate from a British university, we heard you say, "I really believe we are the same... when you come away from India or Pakistan you realize there is no Indian or Pakistani– we’re all together. We are- culturally, as human beings, as friends"

Which Pakistanis are you referring to?

The Pakistanis belonging to the land, admonished as the epicentre of global terrorism, not just by India or USA but even by its friendly allies like Iran or China.

Or is it the self-created, Talibanic Pakistan, who still imposes Jijya on the non believers or finds pleasure in blowing up girl’s schools.

Are you talking about its President class like the current Zardari, vowed to wage a 1,000-year war with India or the late Bhutto who started Jihad in Kashmir that lead to the exodus of Hindu minorities from the Muslim majority state of India, as refugees in their own country?

Are you referring to Pakistanis loyal to the ISI and the military who train their soldiers with only one objective, i.e. to fight Non-Islamic India?

If your mind is concerned about the faceless mass of Pakistanis, does it also include the dwindling minorities?

Or are you just concerned about the celebrities and the social elites?

It is true SRK that we belong to the same human species but it is hard to stretch the similarities much further between "us" and "them".

We from the same original land of Bharat but we want to keep her intact, they want to break it into thousand pieces.

Our ancestors happen to be the same. We acknowledge and adore the heritage but they abhor and decimate whoever is available in an attempt to wipe out the link.

We are culturally the same. We have created the culture over centuries what they dream to destroy in moments.

Ours is a 10,000 year old civilization, theirs is a 62 years old country undoing whole human civilization.

We extend our hands repeatedly to promote friendship and amity; they give us ISI, Lashkar, Harkat, Kashmir, Kargil and 26/11 in exchange.

Do you think that the Indians nationals who died in all the above wars, the Indian soldiers who lost their lives in cross-border ceasefire violations or the Indian civilians who are killed by the ISI trained Islamic terrorists and their affiliates, in all those serial blasts, all over the country, wilfully sacrificed their lives as a friendly neighborhood gesture?

Can you face the families of the victims of Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus or the martyrs of the Kargil war and try to explain to them that "They are good neighbors. Let us love each other."

Can you explain why the two gunmen at Cama hospital, during the Mumbai carnage, asked the man who gave them water, what his religion was, and shot him dead when he said he was a Non-Islamic?

If you cannot, then perhaps you understand why the majority of India does not consider Pakistan as a good neighbor to have.

Perhaps you believe that the peaceful religious co-existence that you created in your home (and we appreciate that) can be extended to the large world outside. As you rightly said, we Indians trust and do accept everybody but what you did fail to mention was that it is the Indic tradition, essentially coming out of its pre-Islamic Hindu ethos.

If you think otherwise, show us a single Islamic country where the non-believers enjoy the same equality as the believers.

Dear Sir, One cannot forget when Vajpayee was extending his hand for peace Musharraf was planning the Kargil insurgency.

Let us remind you, your own statement "I am a Muslim in a country called India .We’ve never been made to feel this is a Hindu country."

Can you find me a Hindu in Pakistan who can reciprocate that sentiment?

Some years ago, another Mr. Khan, first name Feroze, from your fraternity was banned from entering Pakistan for saying, "India is secular unlike Pakistan".

That is the basic difference of the "secular land" of India from the Islamic "pure land" of Pakistan.

So please do not ask us to love Pakistan.

Please do not lump the people of India and Pakistan together. We Indians are proud to preserve our separate identity.

And, please do not insult the land that gave you your life, name and fame, by claiming that her worst enemy, who wants to break her into 1000 pieces, is a great neighbor.

Otherwise it would be sad if somebody accuses you of putting your religion ahead of your country.

Please give it a thought.