Instruments for Exile: building barriers, breaking bridges

What stood out distinctly in latter half of Ibn-ul-Vaqt is how Nazir Ahmed aptly echoes the titular character's shifting perspectives over identity and symbols whereby the imperial rulers and colonized subjects mark their territories. Initially we have a lengthy account of powerful culturally relevant symbols reflecting identity e.g. Ibn-ul-Vaqt's descent from a 'shareef' Muslim family, palace at Rahatgah, the mutiny etc. However, as interaction between Noble Sahib and Ibn-ul-Vaqt progresses accompanied by growing local hostility, we see how stringently the society begins to hold on to symbols which supposedly 'make them Muslims'.


The undertones of social hostility escalate post the infamous lengthy lunch. While namazis debate their concerns over Ibn-ul-Vaqt sharing food with Christians, his aunt interestingly carries hopes of him defeating British with whatever means available. The idea of defeating the other is hence inherently embedded as a communal approach: religion is no longer associated with 'insaan ka khaas tarah ka dily khayaal' but a communally agreed phenomena (maulvi sahib's views are conveniently sidelined). Ibn-ul-Vaqt undoubtedly stands on shaky grounds when he asserts how 'kisi shakhs ko doosre k mazabi maamlay mein dakhal dene ki zaroorat naheen'. Not only is his perspective tangential to society but also the author tactfully shows how he chooses not to conform by conveniently  ignoring his aunt's reply to his tirade of what makes a Muslim pious.

As far as adorning British identity is concerned, the author consciously paints hilarity of Ibn-ul-Vaqt parading and 'din k gyaara bajay se le kar ab ye teesree dafa angrezi tehzeeb k kaprey badlne'. Despite comically thorough attempts to adopt British lifestyle, the lengthy speech he gives specifies his role as far as colonizers are concerned. Even wearing British clothes, he is reverted to training a community which won't have him, preaching religious view deemed unanimously inappropriate by those he is commissioned to train. Ibn-ul-Vaqt is therefore removed from both spheres. Additionally, the confused identity is intensified since British won’t have him if he is not a Muslim open to British ideas while he is not a Muslim if he mingles with the colonizers.

Accompanying the shady margin which neither makes Ibn-ul-Vaqt Muslim nor British, Nazir Ahmed delves into trivialities which now serve as benchmarks for who is Muslim. The degradation of Ibn-ul-Vaqt is microscopically analyzed with shortening surahs and ultimately doing away with namaz. The biting criticism becomes scathingly comical, going far enough to equate choice of pets as analogous to Ibn-ul-Vaqt’s fall from grace. The formerly ‘shareef’ Muslim now has a twin: the pet dog which follows him around. Views over alcohol consumption again measure difference between the two: Muslim’s ticket to hell vs. British medicine. Ironically, Ibn-ul-Vaqt can associate with neither: he cannot drink because the doctor told him not to. The dilemma worsens with introduction of the pious Hujat-ul-Islam as a perfect foil.

Conclusively, amid intricacies involved in demarcating boundaries to distinguish the Other, readers cannot help but question the character’s fate. Religion is not a personal issue. Family cannot be isolated from communal belief. Even language, food, pets and clothes are social statements as to where and with whom you belong. But if you do not fit in either, since individual bereft of community cannot, then where do you go? Giving up your community and failing to fit in afresh, who are you? As the Eurasian puts it: