Bringing up a Terrorist?

The flashing news of Talha Almas, 17 of being the youngest Briton suicide bomber in Syria gave shivers to me. His photographs in IS (Islamic State) black dress with a smile on his face and IS flag in the background was saying something louder. His calm face was really disturbing as if it was saying that the boy was very much convinced of the ‘sacrifice’ he was going to make for his religion. It is really difficult to say how he got himself dehumanized in such a way that he was happily ready to kill himself with several others. The family and neighborhood of the boy in Dewsbury, UK were shocked. They were only saying that they had no idea that a simpleton like Almas could become a suicide bomber. The family was of view that Almas must have been ‘radicalized’ online. Almas is not alone, a number of youngsters from Britain reported to have joined IS. It would not be a surprise, if we hear of some more cases like this.

Pic: dailystar.com

To tackle radicalization of Muslim youths, the British government has taken several policy level decisions. They have started several de-radicalization programmes and MI5 (the British intelligence) has come out with a report on radicalization. But these are ‘classified’ activities of the British security agencies. General public in UK or elsewhere tries to dig into the upbringings of a Muslim child. They start questioning the family for radicalizing young minds. BBC Radio Asian network today asked a question to its listeners: Does radicalisation start with the family? The responses were mix, but a majority of them considered family to be responsible for the radicalization of their child. This reminded me of a debate followed by the Boston bombings two years ago (April 2013). The discussion revolved around how the bomber-brothers got radicalized. Newsmen were discussing how Tamerlane had changed radically during his last visit to his native town in North Caucuses (Russia). During an interview with his aunt it was asked whether he had started going to mosques. It appeared from the discussion that the accused used to visit local mosque and a change was noticed by his father and his aunt on his last visit to North Caucuses six months ago and it was understood that the guy was actually radicalized in US itself. It also appeared that the family of the man was not religious at all and they seldom visit a mosque. Though, it is not difficult to understand the situation of ethnic Chechans in North Caucuses (Russia), which is passing through a clash between the separatists and the Russian Federation. However, what troubled me is that how the West understands the process of ‘radicalization’ of a person. If someone is a practicing his religion, going to churches or a temple or for that matter a mosque, how can it be understood that the person is being ‘radicalized’ to become a terrorist? I understand this could be one of the processes. But when we cast a glance at the cases of terrorism and their executers, we can easily see a trend that most of them are those who did not study Islam at their primary level (they did not read Quran and have no basic knowledge about their religion), which was a mandatory atleast, in South Asia.

  A child begins his/her education in a traditional Muslim household with bismillah-khwani (reading of bismillah), which is administered by an elder in the family or an imam of a nearby mosque who also takes care of basic education in the maktab attached to the mosque. In my family like others of my village, every child attended a maktab attached to the local mosque, where we learnt reading Arabic (basically, Quran), reading and writing Urdu, Persian and Hindi and did basics of mathematics (jama, ghatao, zarab &  taqseem). Interestingly, while learning Urdu, we were instructed into basics of Islam, which included Islamic history and a blend of basic dos and don’ts of Islamic way of life. We had a series of Urdu books called Urdu ki Pehli (First book of Urdu), Urdu ki Doosri (Second Book of Urdu), Urdu ki Teesri (third book of Urdu), Urdu ki Chauthi (Fourth book of Urdu) and Urdu ki Panchvi (Fifth Book of Urdu). I remember a couple of stories from the series through which I think, one can peep into the content of the syllabus:

The story begins with a header: ‘One should honor his guest whether he is a Muslim or not’

    Prophet Mohammad always emphasized on giving respects to the visiting guests. Once a group of Jews visited the Prophet, since the number of guests was large and he had limited resources, he asked his sahabi (companions) to distribute one person each among themselves and honor them in fitting manners. One of them was known for his mischievous activities, therefore none from among the companions of the Prophet agreed to host him and he stayed with the Prophet himself. The Prophet got prepared all kinds of good food for the guest. A well-known mischief like him ate all the food and did not think of other people whose guest he was! The prophet did not say him anything and made his bed for his comfortable stay.  After such an over-eating, he fell ill and he kept running to the toilet whole night. By the dawn, he even soiled the bed and left home without informing anyone, when the Prophet came looking for him, he did not find his guest. He enquired about the guest but no one had any clue about him. The companions of the Prophet could not bear the insult inflicted on the Prophet of Allah and started fuming at the Jew, the Prophet of Allah said, ‘do not say anything to the man, he was my guest and it is my duty to be respectful to him’. The Prophet then started washing the bed-sheet with his own hand. In the meantime, the Jew came back to take his jewel studded sword, which he had left in the room and he saw that Prophet Muhammad is washing his clothes which he had soiled with his feces. Seeing this he felt ashamed and offered his apologies to the Prophet.

Now the narrator of the story says, dear children! Be alert! Always take care of your guest by offering him good food, with your gentle smile and good behavior, it doesn’t matter if he is a non-Muslim, he is equally honorable and your duties towards your guests are the same.      

The story is from the first book (Urdu ki Pehli), which means the student has just learned how to read Urdu therefore, the story is small and uses very simple words which can easily be read by a beginner. However, the text becomes richer with every step and it can be found in subsequent books of the series.

I remember one more story which was perhaps from a higher volume of the series. The story belongs to the Hijra era of the Prophet, it is like this:

It is said that there was only one well in Medina, which was the property of a Jew, who used to sell its water. The Prophet considered water among God’s bounties to His creatures and it should not be bought or sold, therefore, he asked the Jew to sell his well, known as Bir Ruma to the Muslims. The Jew demanded a very hefty price, which Muslims were unable to pay. Then the Prophet asked him to sell half of his possession and the deal got struck at a very inflated price. Uthman b Affan paid the price and Muslims became owner of half of the well. It was agreed that the Muslims and the Jew shall draw water every alternate day. On the day reserved for Muslims, general public, Muslims as well as Jews used to store water for the next day. Hence, the demand for his (Jew’s) water completely ceased. The Jew, now, requested the prophet to purchase his share of the well too and the Muslims, after paying some more money dedicated it for the use of general public, Muslims as well as Jews. This way the Prophet allowed the creature of God to enjoy His bounty for free. Dear children, the Prophet not only belong to the Muslims, he is rahmat ul lil aalamin (grace for the worlds); he belongs to the entire creature.   

This story, in fact, is taken from Muslim Sharif, the Hadith (Traditions of the Prophet), which is a source of Islamic history. I found this very recently while writing a paper on waqf.  In the above stories, the young minds are being taught coexistence not on the basis of fictional stories rather the compiler of the texts uses history of the Islamic past, which no one can deny, particularly the so called ‘revivalists’ or the orthodox, those who are called radicals like salafis or wahabis.  The education of maktab can provide a Muslim child with substantial knowledge of Islamic history giving them a necessary knowledge-backup to decide what is right for them and what is politically motivated and they will not become canon-fodder to those who do their destructive identity politics.