An Oath of Vengeance: Blood Demands Blood

Originally published on Desicritics on Jan 31, 2008

“Life for a life, eye for an eye, nose for a nose, ear for an ear, tooth for a tooth, and wounds equal for equal. But whoso forgoeth it (in the way of charity) it shall be expiation for him.” Koran, Surah 5, vs.45

To live under the first part of this declaration, to believe it and to enact it in one’s life places the individual in a position which leaves little room for forgiveness, little consideration for peaceful negotiation and instills the need to keep score. Certainly the idea of “turning the other cheek” as taught by Jesus can not be considered. However, Jesus was a Jew and the teachings of the Old Testament were almost identical to those taught in Surah 5. The idea of an eye for and eye persists yet today in the minds of those who negotiate settlements never solved by Arafat, never solved by present day Israeli leaders. The life for a life belief, and I say belief, not philosophy, makes for self justification and the drawing of hard lines in the sand.

On an individual scale, those who live and breathe this belief, carry their jambiya sheathed, ready for use against any who violate or step across that line. I remember traveling in Yemen Arab Republic and talking to men who carried their curved dagger at the waist, would never consider walking the street without it, they would feel undressed. So, I asked, when have you used your dagger? Why? Different men responded in different ways. One told me that if the dagger was drawn from the sheath to pay another back in kind, one who blasphemed, it must draw blood. Another said that if another’s dagger drew blood, then he would make an oath of vengeance and the aggressor would surely have his blood drawn.

I lived in Northern Nigeria for twelve years. Almost daily I heard the Hausa words, ‘make an oath’, yi rantsuwa. Men, thus protected by the aura of such belief go about relaxed in their passive aggressive stance, knowing that others around them think the same way. I also lived in Pakistan for a number of years and listened to iman se, saugand which was spoken so frequently that it lost its sting.

I was amazed when George Bush used the words crusade when speaking of the actions which would be taken against the Islamic terrorists after 911. Those too were similar words, ‘eye for an eye’ words. Those words drew a line in the sand. George said America would never rest until we got him, Bin Laden that is. They got Saddam but the misplaced vengeance continues in Iraq. The bad press Bush got about using the word crusade changed his language but not his actions. His immediate response was a telling one.

Not long ago Bin Laden said, “Stop spilling our blood so we can stop spilling your blood.” Diane Christian said in her article, Blood Spilling, “Osama bin Laden released a taped message offering to stop his jihad against European nations if they will stop ‘onslaughts against Muslims and interference in their affairs as part of the big American conspiracy against the Islamic world.’ It’s a noteworthy vengeance text, with a new peace-making twist. Bin Laden first claims his war is not terrorism but righteous revenge for brutality against his people and sacred places. He rejects the label of terrorist and returns it: By describing us and our actions as terrorism, you are necessarily describing yourself and your action…Our actions are reactions to your actions that destroy and kill our people in Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine.”

One religious cause against another; Israel and Palestine, or the United States against fundamental radical Islamists wherever they are, in Pakistan, Iraq or Palestine. But how is the common man on the street in Baluchistan or Kabul going to view the common man on the street in Chicago or Dallas? Will all Americans be thought of as aggressors against Islam? How is the average American getting on the sub-way in New York or the next plane to Seattle going to differentiate between those who are Muslim believers, peaceful believers who do not carry oaths of vengeance as part of their costume? Truly we are in a disturbing era in world history. War is being waged against unseen ‘enemies’, particularly those considered to be the ‘most dangerous kind’, those who carry their jambiya sheathed but ready to draw blood, or carrying hidden bombs strapped to their waists; and they can not be recognized on a Bombay railway station.

Our family first left India in 1944, boarding a freighter in Bombay and making our way south all the way to Australia and then on to Los Angeles. During the War! By 1947 we had settled into an American home but each of us carried our ‘Indian’ selves with us. As a school child I learned quickly not to constantly provide answers about India, not to talk about India too much; even though the teachers’ smiles were patient with these new strangers. Now I carry with me my ‘desi’ self, carry it quietly and have for many decades. Does one ever lose the sense of what home meant? The point I am making is that each individual carries with him, her or his social-ethnic and emotional costume. But then Partition came!

Our Indian homes had been in Taxila, Ludhiana and Sialkot. Partition came and as a child, I heard with disbelief the reports of horror and carnage at the new international border, brothers killing brothers and making solemn oaths of vengeance against those who slaughtered their loved ones. But how could the Indian child differentiate between the man getting on the Bombay train or the Lahore PIA flight to Quetta? There were a million wounds, much blood and memories which span generations. Even using the word Partition makes the listeners’ faces in Lahore or Lucknow, harden.

The reaction over the years that followed 911 or 1947 are similar; hardening of the categories, solidifying the rationale for the barriers, giving credence to the arms build up and the need for nuclear weapons, justification for preemptive actions, except now the jambiya that are carried are no longer personal but national and the oaths are based on strange alliances and threats. “Leaders perform their bizarre public ballets making friendship over hatred and common terrorist enemy, ignoring their serious disagreements over the Iraq invasion.” (See Diane Christian’s new book, Blood Sacrifice, available from Amazon.com, Feb. 2008).

Righteous violence and vengeance is the mask that is worn, like the phantom of the opera, it both hides and reveals the wearer; it makes the identity of the wearer grotesque. Look at the faces of shop keepers in Murree, Pakistan, when the Kashmir problem is mentioned. Mouths turn down and harden, eyes become fierce as India’s guilt is considered. The Vale of Kashmir considered to be a ‘heaven on earth’ has become the basis for hatred, revenge and oaths of vengeance keep flying back and forth.

I do not mean to preach, but why have the lessons of peaceful living been forgotten? Why are the noble ideals of ‘turn the other cheek’ forgotten; why is the teaching of serenity, peace and enlightenment of Siddhartha Gautama forgotten? Where is the belief of acceptance of all religions of Hinduism, promotion of non violence, the welcoming of all faiths, where has it gone? Where are these noble ideas and ideals? I think they are with us. But there is a second part to the verse. “But whoso forgoeth it (in the way of charity) it shall be expiation for him.” Vs.45b.

Is there charity? Is there hope? Vivekananda: May he who is the Brahman of the Hindu, the Ahura Mazda of Zoroastrians, the Buddha of the Buddhists, the Jehovah of Jew, the Father in Heaven of Christians give strength to you to carry out your noble ideas. J.H. Barrows, In the World’s Parliament of Religions, (Ed.), Vol. II. Chicago, 1893, p.98