Abstracts
Résumé
De décembre 2019 à mars 2020, l’Inde a été agitée par des manifestations contre deux mesures législatives, soit l’Amendement à la Loi sur la citoyenneté (MLC) et le Registre national des citoyens (RNC), qui discriminaient les musulmans. Les manifestations ont été historiques, même dans un pays de forte culture protestataire. Elles ont été marquées par une solidarité interreligieuse, intergénérationnelle et intercommunautaire et ont été largement menées par des femmes musulmanes. Les manifestations ont provoqué des débats au sujet de la religion et de la citoyenneté dans un état laïc, des débats autant entre manifestants qu’entre les contestataires et les partisans des lois de l’État. Cet article examine les deux slogans contestataires qui ont suscité le débat : un poème ourdou, et la proclamation de foi religieuse des musulmans, la chahada. Il soutient que les débats éclairent quelques-uns des paradoxes de la citoyenneté laïque et posent à nouveau les questions qui ont préoccupé les nationalistes anticolonialistes du 20e siècle. Enfin, l’article suggère que ces controverses sont nécessaires et constitutives des politiques des états ayant une importante pluralité religieuse.
Mots clés:
- Lemons,
- citoyenneté,
- pluralisme religieux,
- laïcité,
- islam,
- Inde,
- poésie
Abstract
From December 2019 through March 2020, India was rocked by protests against two pieces of legislation, the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the National Registry of Citizens (NRC), that discriminated against Muslims. Protests against this legislation were historic, even in a country with a strong culture of political protest: they were marked by inter-religious, inter-generational, and inter-community solidarity and were largely spearheaded by Muslim women. The protests sparked debates about religion and citizenship in a secular state, debates among protesters as well as between protesters and supporters of the state’s laws. This article examines two protest chants that elicited debate: an Urdu poem and the Muslim statement of faith, the Shahada. It argues that the debates illuminate some of the paradoxes of secular citizenship and renew questions that preoccupied anti-colonial nationalists of the twentieth century. Ultimately, the article suggests that these controversies are necessary to and constitutive of politics in religiously-plural states.
Keywords:
- Lemons,
- citizenship,
- religious pluralism,
- secularism,
- Islam,
- India,
- poetry
Resumen
Desde diciembre 2019 hasta marzo 2020, la India ha sido trastornada por manifestaciones contra dos elementos de la legislación: la Enmienda a la Ley sobre la ciudadanía (ELC) y el Registro nacional de ciudadanos (RNC), que discrimina a los musulmanes. Las manifestaciones contra dicha legislación han sido históricas, incluso par un país con una fuerte cultura de protesta. Han estado marcadas por una solidaridad interreligiosa, intergeneracional e intercomunitaria y han sido generalmente dirigidas por mujeres musulmanas. Las manifestaciones han suscitado debates sobre la religión y la ciudadanía en un Estado laico, debates tanto entre manifestantes como entre contestatarios y los partidarios de las leyes del Estado. Este artículo analiza los dos eslóganes contestatarios que suscitaron el debate: un poema urdu y la proclamación de la fe religiosa de los musulmanes la shahada. Se propone que los debates muestran algunas de las paradojas de la ciudadanía laica y plantean nuevamente las cuestiones que han preocupado a los nacionalista anticolonialistas del siglo XX. Finalmente, el artículo sugiere que dichas controversias son necesarias y constitutivas de las políticas de los Estado que poseen una importante pluralidad religiosa.
Palabras clave:
- Lemons,
- ciudadanía,
- pluralismo religioso,
- laicidad,
- islam,
- India,
- poesía
Appendices
Références
- Allan M., 2016, In the Shadow of World Literature: Sites of Reading in Colonial Egypt. Princeton, Princeton University Press.
- Agrama H., 2012, Questioning Secularism: Islam, Sovereignty, and the Rule of Law in Modern Egypt. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, coll. Chicago Studies in Practices of Meaning.
- Asad M., 1980, The Message of the Qurā̕n (traduction). Gibraltar, Dar al-Andalus.
- Asad T., 2003, Formations of the Secular. Stanford, Stanford University Press.
- Ernst C. W., 1985, « From Hagiography to Martyrology: Conflicting Testimonies to a Sufi Martyr of the Delhi Sultanate », History of Religions, 24, 4 : 308-327.
- Esposito J. L. (dir.), « Muhammad », in The Islamic World: Past and Present. Oxford Islamic Studies Online, consulté sur Internet (http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com.proxy3.library.mcgill.ca/article/opr/t243/e232) le 22 juin 2021.
- Faiẓ A. F. et V. G Kiernan, 1958, Poems by Faiz Ahmad Faiz. New Delhi, People’s Publishing House.
- Fārūqī S., 2001, Early Urdu Literary Culture and History. New Delhi, Oxford University Press.
- Fārūqī S.,1981, The Secret Mirror: Essays on Urdu Poetry. 1re édition. Delhi, Academic Literature.
- Fārūqī A. (dir.), 2006, Redefining Urdu Politics in India. New Delhi, Oxford University Press.
- Fernando M. L., 2014. The Republic Unsettled: Muslim French and the Contradictions of Secularism. Durham, Duke University Press.
- Fernando M. L., 2015. « That Muslim Question: Islam and Secularism in Europe. » Anthropology Now, 7, 3 : 125-130.
- Fischel W. J., 1948, « Jews and Judaism at the Court of the Moghul Emperors in Medieval India », Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research, 18 : 137-177.
- Haider A., 2018, Mistaken Identity: Race and Class in the Age of Trump. Londres, Verso.
- Jalal A., 2000, Self and Sovereignty: Individual and Community in South Asian Islam Since 1850. Londres, Routledge.
- Jalal A., 2002, « Negotiating Colonial Modernity and Cultural Difference: Indian Muslim Conceptions of Community and Nation, c. 1878-1914 », in L. T. Fawaz, C. A. Bayly et R. Ilbert,Modernity and Culture: From the Mediterranean to the Indian Ocean. New York, Columbia University Press.
- Jalil R., 2014, Liking Progress, Loving Change: A Literary History of the Progressive Writers’ Movement in Urdu. 1re édition. New Delhi, Oxford University Press.
- Katz N., 2000, « The Identity of a Mystic: The Case of Sa’id Sarmad, a Jewish-Yogi-Sufi Courtier of the Mughals », Numen, 47, 2 : 142-160.
- Li D., 2020, The Universal Enemy: Jihad, Empire, and the Challenge of Solidarity. Stanford University Press.
- Madnī S. Ḥ. A., 2005, Composite Nationalism and Islam: Muttahidah Qaumiyat Aur Islam. New Delhi, Manohar Publishers & Distributors.
- Mahmudabad A. K., 2020, Poetry of Belonging: Muslim Imaginings of India 1850-1950. New Delhi, Oxford University Press.
- Marx K., 1843, La question juive, Université du Québec, consulté sur Internet (https://www.marxists.org/francais/marx/works/1843/00/km18430001c.htm). le 20 juin 2022.
- Metcalf B., 2005, « Introduction », in S. H. A. Madnī, Composite Nationalism and Islam: Muttahidah Qaumiyat Aur Islam. New Delhi, Manohar Publishers & Distributors.
- Mustafa S. (dir.), 2020, Shaheen Bagh and the Idea of India: Writings on a Movement for Justice, Liberty, and Equality. New Delhi, Speaking Tiger Books.
- Narang G. C., 1991, Urdu Language and Literature: Critical Perspectives. New Delhi, Sterling.
- Pasha N., 2020, inS. Mustafa (dir.), 2020, Shaheen Bagh and the Idea of India: Writings on a Movement for Justice, Liberty, and Equality. New Delhi, Speaking Tiger Books.
- Pernau M., 2013, Ashraf into Middle Classes: Muslims in Nineteenth-Century Delhi. New Delhi, Oxford University Press.
- Pritchett F. W., 1994, Nets of Awareness: Urdu Poetry and Its Critics. Berkeley, University of California Press.
- Qasmi A. U. et M. E. Robb (dir.), 2017, Muslims against the Muslim League: Critiques of the Idea of Pakistan. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
- Rai L., 1978, Sarmad, His Life and Rubāīs. 1re édition. Gorakhpur, Hanumanprasad Poddar Smarak Samiti.
- Scott J. W., 2018, Sex and Secularism. Princeton, Princeton University Press.
- Schimmel A., 1975, Mystical Dimensions of Islam. Chapel Hill, University of North Carolina Press.
- Sullivan W. F., 2005, The Impossibility of Religious Freedom. Princeton, Princeton University Press.