Quo vadis Institution of Marriage

                                                                Quo Vadis Institution of Marriage

                                                                        By Nalinaksha Mutsuddi

 I have chosen the following three news items to explicate my views on the topic. The wind still blows from the West that is why American examples are taken. India and other countries are just being blown away by the western wind.

 1. The flamboyant running mate of John McCain – the former republican presidential candidate -- Sarah   Palin’s daughter, Bristol Palin gave birth to a son at 17 while she was still in schools.

 2. Mimi Alford, an intern in the white house, lost her virginity to the then President J.F.Kennedy, in the presidential bedroom.

 3. In the US most births are taking place to women under thirty out of wedlock.

Now, to elaborate on each item: Sex is a biological need. With the development of the body, hormonal change occurs rapidly creating an urge for sex. In youth it is high, tapering gradually with age. Emotion for sex is very strong. It is natural for opposite sexes to be drawn closer to each other and get united physically to satisfy the natural urge. Viewed objectively, there is nothing wrong. Now there are plenty of opportunities for a mingling of boys and girls and the obvious thing happens. From the media – print or electronic -- A to Z information about sex is available to anybody. Pornography is only a click away. Mobile phones and Internet help to find partners easily at convenient time and place. Vestiges of conventional moral norms are no more traceable due to an onslaught of dynamic liberalization. We have ushered in a time zone of unlimited freedom.

In America – and in many western countries -- this need is pragmatically viewed. In a bid to avoid STDs and unwanted pregnancies, condom and pill vending machines are made available in many western schools. Despite precautionary measures, slips do occur and pregnancy ensues. There are many schools providing crèche facilities for unmarried teen mums to enable them to complete schooling. Girls feed their babies during breaks. For us, it’s still a distant dream, but it is debatable to rule out its possibility for good. Who could imagine, a few decades back, our school children will be having boy and girl friends and talk endlessly on their mobiles to find a cosy cooing rendezvous. Dating is in vogue among the youth. It’s no more confined to urban schools only. It is rapidly spreading to the rural areas too. Only recently two teenage sisters barely 17 and 19 from Haryana village collaborated with their boyfriends to kill their parents because parents were objecting to their relationship.  Premarital sex is on the rise. Many school children are sexually active. Western counterparts are more promiscuous. India and other countries are not falling far behind. They too are catching up fast. While former US President George Bush was distributing silver rings and a copy of Bible to school children for pledging abstinence till marriage, a girl was heard yelling ‘sex is good’ within hearing range of Bush as shown in the BBC footage. Sex is no more a taboo. Prudish outlook is on the way out. Reversing the trend is unimaginable. It’s the order of the day.  Inability to adapt to new paradigm shift will be at the risk of personal mental unease.

Coming to the second point: it was her fourth day at work; she was only 19 by then. At lunchtime, she was invited to swim in the White House pool. Unannounced the president joined her. Later, after lunch, she was led by the president to see the décor of the interiors of the White House and in the process, she was laid to bed in the presidential boudoir. It was not possible for her to say no to the president. Circumstances compelled Ms. Alford to have unwanted sex. Such circumstances do exist under current work places where similar compulsion may prevail. With mobility and mingling opportunity of both sexes self-generated emotional compulsion also can play a great part in such acts as it happened in the case of Lewinsky and Clinton – both were equally ignited by love spark.  Who knows when one will develop crush on the other? With relaxed moral standard, fortified with effective contraceptives, casual sex may be mutually agreed upon occasionally.   So, anybody is likely to be carried away without being consciously aware of.   It can happen willingly or unwillingly. This is a reality, whether one likes it or not.

Turning to the last point: marriage is a socially approved agreement between two individuals of opposite sexes to fulfil a mutual biological need. It is sanctified by religious rites and vows for lifelong fidelity. And it used to be more or less like that in old days – with sporadic unreported exceptions if any. It’s no more so irrespective of whether solemnised by religious rites or formalised by a legal document. It is rather natural for those who indulged in sexual activity in schools, or subjected to casual sex under varying circumstances may be inclined to stray even after getting married – albeit just for the heck of change or fun. Many celebs provide role models by having multiple sex partners out of wedlock without losing a tad of social respectability. The renowned sex therapists Berman Sisters duo poses a poignant question to fellow sisters if it’s desirable today to hitch lifelong fidelity to one guy while being drowned in an ocean of tempting alternatives. Both sexes are available in the workplaces. Both are economically independent and conscious of individual rights and freedom. Even otherwise, adjustment in a marital relationship is proving to be difficult because of conflicting likings and idiosyncrasies and growing individualism. As a result, a surge in divorce rate is visible.  East or west divorce is still considered a traumatic experience for both or the other. The absence of inhibiting stigma revs up the drift.  Here, living-in system stems in with added advantage of loose commitment and more freedom – sounding the death knell of an institution of marriage. This is the rising trend of the day.

The Supreme Court of India gave legal sanction to the living-in system. The western wind is slowly but surely engulfing the whole of the younger generation of the world. It’s only matter of time till further evolution of human relationship emerges. Keep your fingers crossed.

A Future To Believe IN

                                                  

Bernie Sanders fired the imagination of a good chunk of American youth with his rallying cry of a future to believe in. The ground was ripe to enflame the vision due to skyrocketing inequality, dwindling employment outlets, stagnant wages, the prohibitive cost of education and healthcare etc.  The promised future offers free education, free medical treatment, and removal of inequality and many other popular demands for all Americans. To believe it will die of premature death is to live in utopia. The idea is likely to live on.  He calls it a ‘revolution’ – a revolution through ballots, not bullets.

We know all too well the same kind of revolution through bullets was brought about in Russia during October revolution of 1917 with the same good old promises of whatever Bernie Sanders pledges now. It provided education, health and jobs for all citizens. Everything changed by the sweep of revolution.

Prof. C.P. Snow, a British scientist, had to confront an unwelcome question while on a visit to the land of revolution during Stalin era. The question was: “You boast of Oxford and Cambridge; how many workers and farmer’s children are enrolled there?” Prof. Snow was non-plussed to answer. Moscow University could be proud of having many offspring of peasants and working class on its roll. If any gifted child is found in any remote corner of the country to a poor farmer or worker, the parents need not bother for his education and future. The son/daughter will be provided free education in an institution suitable for the flowering of the talent of the child concerned, and it offered so many other benefits for all. This is amid banishment of a sizeable number of people, identified as enemies of the people to the harsh labour camps of far-flung Siberia. 

Nikita Khrushchev banged his heavy boots on the table in the course of his visit to America during JF Kennedy’s time and thundered, “We will surpass you”.

Alas, that solemn declaration could never be fulfilled. Eventually, the great Soviet Union collapsed and the fruits of the revolution lost. Capitalism with portents of inequality -- the main irritant of American disquiet -- returned with a flourish. Russia has many billionaires now to boast of. It embraced crony capitalism too, unabashedly.

Why the dream revolution soured?  First time in human history the thought of planned development for the whole country took shape. Each five-year plans were comprehensively worked out in minute details. No sphere of developmental need is left unattended. Still, it remained a drawing board dream. Actual implementation fell far short of the goal. It can possibly be traced to the basic selfish instinct of human soul. Take the silliest case of productivity of the communes. In the commune, it is everybody’s job, which means nobody’s job as long as it doesn’t threaten anybody’s job security. It is found that the yield of the same peasant much better comparatively in the small plots attached to individual residences than he/she contributes in the communes. Marx’s proposition -- ‘From each according to capacity, to each according to necessity’ failed. Nobody contributes in accordance with his ability, but everybody is eager to share the fruit equally. A century ago human necessity was far less than of today. Today’s exploding need knows no bounds. And it’s so varied too. So it won’t work in the actual field. Consequently, the bubble will get blown up.  

It’s presumed under the environment of complacent security, human performance suffers. It is sad to note majority deliver at an optimum level only when pushed to the extremes. And hire and fire policy is non-existent in the system. Bernie Sanders and his fans should be cautious to ensure how to usher into that promised future and sustain it when arrived.

One good citizen of the world sent me a very exciting video depicting the emerging demographic scenario of the future. It painstakingly analyses the fast unfolding pattern of the world population. It’s a sort of undeclared race, in which the overwhelmingly bulging Islamic contingent comes to the fore. I find it irrefutable – it’s as certain as death; because, Muslim fertility rate is much higher than any other ethnic group. It will easily overtake others in numbers fulfilling s the prediction of former Algerian President Muammar Gaddafi that the future world would be predominantly Islamic, without using sword or resorting to terrorist acts. Obviously, it dismays a sizeable section of humankind, while Islamic folks should rightfully rejoice over the fact.

So, Muslims should feel jubilant for gaining overall supremacy in the not so distant future. But will that future be really peaceful and therefore, desirable?

Here I’ll present my view on the topic – not in the capacity of any authority, but as a common  member of global society. It is purely based on empirical phenomena impacting on a sensitive mind. So, be ready to take it with a pinch of salt.

I am a hardcore atheist, at the same time a hardcore secularist. I always respect a believer – any believer. If the whole world becomes ‘red’ or ‘blue’ it hardly matters to me. And it doesn’t matter to the Earth either – it’ll keep spinning on its axis with a slant of 23 degrees as ever.  I understand belief is a supreme necessity for majority of mankind.  Each belief is sacred and equally important as in the case of any other believer. I can imagine how dear one’s belief is to his/her heart. As per Buddhist Channel, Kuala Lumpur, there are about 4,000 religions in the world – including the mainstream and those on the outermost fringes.  Every believer thinks only s/he is on the right track; every other groping in the dark alley in futility. And I believe every individual has the right to think differently.

Everybody is conditioned by the envelope of environment. That envelope embraces anything tangible or intangible the subject comes in contact with. It includes you, me and every other body.

I don’t believe in total view – an oft-repeated phrase of J.D. Krishanamurthy. I think, having a ‘total’ view is an impossible concept. No man can have a total view of anything –this is humanly impossible. Some deficiency will always remain. One may suffer from the illusion that his view is total – including that of Krishnamurthy. But whatever I see now appears broadly correct for the time being. However, it is always a relative perception. Again, the ‘domain’ of relativity keeps on changing. So, take for granted my views are not free from imperfections.

Professor Huntington propagated the theory of ‘Clash of Civilizations’.  This primarily relates impending disharmony between Islam and Christianity. However, many denounced him. I consider either it is done deliberately or due to one’s failure to see it through right perspective. What I observe now is not clash of civilizations – which is visible even now -- rather, ‘clash within civilization’ itself.

To prove my point I will cite two recent incidents taken at random.

Saudi Arabia, a staunchly conservative Muslim country, of late allowed women to participate in sports activity. Of course, it is not without a rider: it is restricted to elite private schools only. Private schools cater to handful rich sections of the society. The majority of other schools remain debarred. Still, it is a relaxation of the strictness of longstanding conservatism. Saudi participated in London Olympics by sending some women athletes.  It is a token participation, not with the intention of competing though. All the same, it signifies loosening of traditional orthodoxy even in the most conservative Islamic country. And it is bound to happen sooner or later, because under the impact of globalization spawned by technological advances none can remain insulated from the rising tide of modernity. So, with the passage of time it assumes the importance of inevitability. The end result: no conservatism can ward off the inescapable erosion of old customs. It is visible in many other Islamic countries – like Turkey, Indonesia, Pakistan, and Lebanon et al. It will happen in the remaining -- if any -- orthodox countries as well, in due course of time.

The other incident is the fierce opposition of a section of people protesting against declaring Bangladesh a secular country. They demand it should be designated an Islamic country.

Both the trends are contradictory to each other. On the one hand there will be breakdown of the traditional citadel of orthodoxy; on the other there will be tremendous opposition to transition to modernity -- an unavoidable compulsion of the time. This kind of tug of war occurred with any reform movement in Christianity and Hinduism too. But the obduracy was of a different kind. In other cases that got stabilized by subsequent reconciliation, which may not be possible in case of Islam. The entire Islamic world will remain festered due to this perennial inner contradiction. On the one hand the modern states will not be able to remain insulated, on the other there will be staunch resistance to opening out. It will remain a persisting paradox.

Take the recent incidents of Sunni Muslims washing off the Koranic verses from the walls of Ahmedia mosques in Pakistan. Not to talk of tolerating other religions, intolerance remains within Islamic communities itself. Ahmedias also are ‘infidel’. Current terrorist activities going on Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan are carried out by Muslims for the noble cause of maintaining purity of Islam. Even if the other kind of terrorism is eliminated, Islamic terrorism is unlikely to be wiped out. It is based on ‘true’ interpretation of scripture. There are innumerable ingredients which can easily be interpreted as anti-Islamic triggering mass conflict. Do you think Shia-Sunni dispute will ever be resolved? Similarly many more discords will spring up between Islamic nations and within an Islamic nation with the passage of time.

Presenting Jihad means ‘struggle for self improvement’ and ‘blasphemy an invitation for further discussion’ – as some liberal Islamists try to advance – is not going to cut ice with the radicals. No need of bringing any other religious belief colliding with Islam – it is generated within Islam.

It will pose serious problem in the future. I don’t think it can be warded off. Only endeavour, if at all, could be to limit it. That itself will be a tough task in the future.

Don’t brush it off or gloss over it. It seems to be a real threat – even if the whole world turns to Islam – as it is claimed or desired by many – the threat will remain alive and intensify with time.
In every religion there are different sects – it is bound to be. Let’s take the case of Buddhism:  There are many forms of it;  Theravadins, Mahayanists , Pure Land Buddhists and Nichiren Buddhists and so forth. Similar is the case with any other mainstream religions, like Christianity and Hinduism. All differ widely, still coexist with peace. This may not be possible with Islam. Saudi’s opening up and Bangladesh’s opposition to it – both are unavoidable. Both conflicting compulsions will remain active. This is the germ of constant conflict. To think it can be eradicated is to believe in utopia.

Islam is the fastest growing religion of the world today. Irshad Manji, a Canadian reformist and progressive interpreter of Islam, confesses her father was a ‘nominal’ Muslim.  How many Khans are ‘nominal’ Muslims in India?  I’m appalled to find remarks that Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, founder of Aligarh Muslim University, was not a true Muslim.  All moderate Muslims fall to this category. Does Irshad Manji represent a true Muslim?  Our own Imam of Jama Masjid,  Maulana Syed Ahmed Bukhari called renowned celebrity figure, social activist and a former MP,  Shabana Azmi a ‘naachne gaanewaali aurat’.   He couldn’t take any action on her but resentment continues to smoulder inside. Can the Koran – receptacle of Allah’s exact words – be tampered with? By modernizing and re-interpreting Koran will mean gross mutilation of the Holy Book – it will no longer remain a revered repository of God’s own words. So, there will be enormous discords in the future.

If you think in a predominantly Islamic world there will be no ‘dhimmy’ – that is no non-Muslim or infidel, thereby eliminating altogether existence of ‘Dar al-harb ‘– the ‘zone of conflict’ and the entire world will  be ushered in to ‘Dar al-Islam’ – the ‘zone of peace’ you are likely to be in a huge ‘Blunderland’.