The Shade of Swords: Jihad and the Conflict between Islam and Christianity By M J Akbar Roli Books; Rs 395 |
THERE is only one compelling reason to read M J Akbar’s The Shade of Swords. We have to live with Islam just as much as Islam has to live with us. We cannot wish the Muslim world away just as much as the Muslim world cannot delude itself that non-believers exist to be eliminated. We have to rationalise these often bloodletting combative faiths, just as much as we have to understand that the individuals who brought down the World Trade Center in September 2001, or other citadels over past centuries, did so because, for them, religion is only revenge.
In Akbar’s book, no one embodies the spirit of revenge better than one of the heroines of the early days of Islam, a firebrand called Hind who was married to Abu Sufyan, one of the first challengers of Prophet Mohammed’s authority. Hind hated Mohammed and, after the battle of Badr, where she lost her father and two sons, refused to sleep with her husband unless she got her revenge. ‘‘In addition she promised herself she would eat the liver of that great Muslim warrior, Hamza, uncle of the Prophet.’’ In a subsequent battle, she did just that: She tore out Hamza’s liver and ate it.
In his earlier works Nehru: The Making of India and The Siege Within, Akbar dealt with cataclysms that shaped India and our immediate geography. In those works he exhibited the ability to write with emotion and to comment with extreme detachment. Not so in The Shade of Swords. There is a magnificent passion here, a profound consummation of a desire to set the record straight about Islam. The theme is so audacious and ambitious that reader and author both disembark from the rollercoaster visibly scathed.
On a backdrop punctuated by war, deceit and political statecraft, Akbar tells a story like it should be told, penning a sensitive and sometimes anguished portrait of the conflict between two religions that have clashed constantly because conflict was directly proportional to territorial and ideological growth. For that reason The Shade of Swords will undeniably accrue praise from those who wish to unravel the composition of the fuels that stoke the Islamic mind. It may well also end up invoking the predictable ire of bigots who have thrived by their castigation of the Muslim raison d’etre.
It will be a gross mistake to group this book with all the post-September 11 quickies. The Shade of Swords is about history, about geography, about politics, and above all about the people who gave life to Islam. I had as much fun reading it and learning from it as I had reading and learning from the Old and New Testaments as a child.
When the book is released in the West later this month, Christian theologians will be challenged because Muslim religion, ideology, and polity has never been presented so honestly, evoking an uncharacteristic understanding of a much misunderstood faith. It will disturb many factions of the Muslim ruling class who, Akbar argues, have been guilty of perpetuating religious travesty for political gain. And in India, if it is translated into Hindi, it will be a runaway bestseller but will end up exciting the passions of communities who refuse to transcend Godhra. Akbar does not make a case for the terrorist. He makes a case for Jihad. And that in today’s world is fast becoming the obligatory pill to swallow for George Bush and a different set of terrorists in Washington.