His name is (Shah Rukh) Khan
And he is
entitled to have a conversation about what it means to be Muslim in India
without having his patriotism questioned
By now I am sure all of you are au fait with the latest
controversy to erupt around the Badshah of Bollywood, Shah Rukh Khan. But for
those of you inhabiting a parallel universe, here are the bare bones. Khan gave
an interview to an international publication called Outlook Turning Points in
which, among other things, he discussed being a Muslim in a post 9/11 world.
It was in this context that he made his now-infamous
statement. “I sometimes become the inadvertent object of political leaders who
choose to make me a symbol of all that they think is wrong and unpatriotic
about Muslims in India...There have been occasions when I have been accused of
bearing allegiance to our neighbouring country rather than my own country –
this even though I am an Indian, whose father fought for the freedom of India.
Rallies have been held where leaders have exhorted me to leave and return to
what they refer to as my original homeland.”
No sooner had this interview hit the stands than Hafiz
Saeed, no slouch when it comes to self-promotion, issued a statement inviting
Shah Rukh Khan to come live in Pakistan if he felt unsafe in India. The
Pakistani terror mastermind added generously that Khan could stay in Pakistan
as long as he liked.
Cue, shock, horror and outrage in the Indian media, best
summed up by the headline Firstpost gave to its comment piece on the
controversy. “King of Victimhood,” it screamed, “Shah Rukh Khan bites the hand
that fed him.” After much fulminating about how Shah Rukh didn’t really deserve
the adulation of the Indian masses – who worshipped him without worrying about
his religion – the writer went to exhort Khan to “grow up” and “take it on the
chin like a man” and not provide space for “low-life terrorists like Hafiz
Saeed to take pot-shots at India”.
Okay, now that you’re all up to speed, let’s just see what
happened there.
Shah Rukh Khan’s jibe at some political leaders who targeted
him was clearly a reference to the late Bal Thackeray and the Shiv Sena, with
whom he has had a troubled history. Has the Shiv Sena doubted Shah Rukh Khan’s
patriotism on occasion? Yes, it has. Has it accused him of being a Pakistani
sympathiser? Yes, it has. Has it held demonstrations during which Khan was
asked to go ‘home’ to Pakistan? Yes, it has.
So far, so true.
Now that we have cleared up what Khan said, here’s a quick
summary of what Shah Rukh did NOT say. Did he say that he had been targeted by
the people of India because of his religion or his surname? No, he did not. Did
he complain about how his film career had suffered because he was a Muslim? No,
he did not. Did he accuse film-goers of being biased against him because of
whom and how he worshipped? No, he did not.
In other words, he did not bite the millions of hands that
had fed him. He did not spit in the face of the fans who have made him what he
is. So why attack him on completely spurious grounds? I can understand taking
on a man for what he said. But targeting him for something he did not say? That
is just plain stupid.
Is it Khan’s fault that Hafiz Saeed pounced on this
interview to extend an invitation to him to come live in Pakistan? No, it
isn’t. And it would be the ultimate triumph of the two-nation theory if we
can’t even have a conversation about what it means to be a Muslim in India
without getting all defensive about Pakistan.
Which of us can deny that it isn’t always easy having a
Muslim surname in India? Never mind the festering wounds inflicted by the
shameful riots of Gujarat, everyday life comes with its own set of challenges.
Just finding someone willing to rent you a house becomes a Herculean task. Negotiating
a job interview can be a minefield. Getting a passport is a veritable
nightmare. (And when you do, racial profiling follows you to every immigration
counter in the world.)
And yet, such is the inherent strength and strange beauty of
India’s secularism that the three biggest stars in the Bollywood firmament –
Salman, Aamir and Shah Rukh – can rejoice in the name of Khan. Surely that is
something to celebrate in a world that is increasingly fractious and divided?
We should take pride in the fact that it doesn’t matter how
much political leaders try and divide us on the basis of religion. At the end
of the day, the people of India worship who they want to, irrespective of which
God they – or the objects of their devotion – worship.