| |
|
Joining issue with the UK-based charity that was reported by the Indian Express to have issued an ultimatum to the Muslims it had helped rehabilitate to follow the Shariah rules, Javed Anand takes on all those who have converted faith into a totalitarian ideology:
But beware of the dangers of the malevolent, modern-day messiahs. Unlike the poor maulvi sahib from a Muslim mohalla, this seemingly sophisticated lot comes draped in suit and tie, speaks fluent English, swears faith in “reason and logic”, quotes from the Vedas and the Bible as comfortably as from the Quran, oozes cash and promotes disharmony and discord in the name of peace. Don’t take them lightly for many among the new generation of otherwise well-educated but theologically ignorant Muslims assume this out-of-date medievalism to mean ‘Modern Islam’.
Read the full piece at the Indian Express: A Conditional Charity
Full Post
|
POSTED BY Sundeep ON Nov 19, 2009 AT 00:34 IST
Apart from pointing out that a fatwa is only binding on its author, Aijaz Ilmi comes to the heart of the matter:
I wish resolutions at Deoband had addressed the following questions: Why do Indian Muslims have the highest levels of illiteracy, both male and female, in the country? Why do we have the highest number of school drop-outs? Why do we have the lowest representation in both the public and the private sector? What steps are we taking to stop pernicious recruiters who lure young impressionable minds towards terror ideologies? A failure to tackle the rapid socio-economic slide will push the faithful instead towards being the last amongst the least. With the Shiv Sena and the VHP joining in, the zealots will raise this needless debate to a crescendo overshadowing real issues.
Read the full piece at the Indian Express
On the same subject, in DNA, Anil Dharker says:
Not the west, not the United States of America, not Jews, not extremist Hindus.... Islam's worst enemies are Muslims.
And Sultan Shahin is characteristically blunt and says:
"Jamiat's burkha is slipping and the veneer of broadmindedness is wearing off"
Full Post
|
POSTED BY Sundeep ON Nov 11, 2009 AT 01:37 IST
So Vande Mataram is once again in the news, with one of the 25 resolutions passed by Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind at its 30th general session in the presence of Union Home Minister P Chidambaram, affirming that
"The [2006] fatwa of Darul Uloom (opposing recitation of Vande Mataram) is correct."
Here's a link to the full FAQ on the 2006 controversy, along with a link to the Congress Working Committee, in Calcutta on October 26, 1937, under the presidentship of Jawaharlal Nehru which provides a historical perspective.
And here's the full coverage from the Outlook Archives
Full Post
|
POSTED BY Sundeep ON Nov 03, 2009 AT 20:13 IST
Javed Anand in the Asian Age:
Adarniya Sarsanghchalak Bhagwatji,Saadar Pranaam!
Oct.14 : I am deeply moved by your humko bhi parkho Dussehra Day invite sent out to Muslims and Christians to join the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). So, the Sangh Parivar, here I come. Please treat this letter as my application for entry into the fold for your kind consideration. I understand from the media that all you want is for the likes of me to accept that "all Muslims in India were Hindus in the past... who have only changed their method of worship".
Read the full piece at the Asian Age
Full Post
|
POSTED BY Sundeep ON Oct 15, 2009 AT 04:11 IST
Tahir Mahmood in the Indian Express:
As all other communities now have a choice between the general civil law and their respective personal laws, duly codified and reformed wherever necessary; Muslims alone cannot be left to choose between the civil law and an outdated version of their personal law with all its distortions and misinterpretations intact. Turning the principles of Muslim law into a legislative enactment will, of course, be no novelty. Such an exercise has already been undertaken in a score of Muslim countries in West Asia and North Africa. (Non-Muslim countries too: look at the Philippines Code of Muslim Law 1977.) There is no justification for India lagging behind; especially since those countries’ efforts have made the job easier for India. Muslim law can be codified here simply by making an eclectic choice from amongst the statutory provisions of those countries in conformity with Indian social conditions.
More here
Full Post
|
POSTED BY Sundeep ON Oct 13, 2009 AT 04:29 IST
Javed Anand takes up the old question of madrasa reforms and the draft bill — the Central Madrasa Board Bill 2008 — currently in circulation and examines the Sachar Committee observation that only 4 per cent Muslim children go to a madrasa for education. So Why doesn’t the government concentrate on the education of the 96 per cent instead of losing sleep over the future of 4 per cent?
A rounded education for the 4 per cent is critical, for it is they from whom the 96 per cent learn their Islam. Because of the compartmentalised, fragmented, insular and sectarian nature of his education, the Maulvi Sahib’s ignorance of the world he inhabits is tragic — and the Mr Muslim’s knowledge of Islam pathetic.
But of course, Muslims must be part of the battle against the neo-cons, the neo-colonialists, the uncritical Westophiles and the diehard Islamophobes. The good news is that there is a growing tribe of Muslim men and women who are engaged in this battle for hearts and minds and I can rattle off a long list of names. Sadly, or maybe not, almost all of them occupy distinguished positions in the top universities of the West. They are proud of their Islam which is different from yours and the West is listening with interest and respect. A pity not one of them will find a place in any madrasa or university in the Islamic world...
Read more at the Indian Express
Full Post
|
POSTED BY Sundeep ON Oct 13, 2009 AT 02:53 IST
Writing in the Indian Express recently, Javed Anand questioned why the Law Commission of India has failed to recommend the introduction of similar reforms into Muslim Personal Law in India as have been introduced in country after country. Tahir Mahmood responds:
...on the question of perpetuating their ‘sacrosanct’ personal law — howsoever repugnant to the spirit of Islam its present practice may be — the community can disown even their most trusted well-wishers.
As in many family-law matters, Muslims are being inexplicably governed by outdated local customs repugnant to Islamic law, a report was drafted to recommend that — on the pattern of the scope of all other community-specific family laws of India — all Muslims everywhere in the country should, in family-law matters, be governed by Muslim law. The innocuous move was shouted down by religious leaders as a “conspiracy to pave the way for a uniform civil code.” The report had to be shelved.
Read the full article at the Indian Express
Full Post
|
POSTED BY Sundeep ON Sep 07, 2009 AT 23:20 IST
R. Jagannathan joins issue with Tahir Mahmood, member of the Law Commission, in the DNA:
The Law Commission's opinion on Islam and bigamy is well intentioned, but it's really a double-edged sword. For two reasons. First, it is not appropriate for a non-religious body to quote the scriptures to justify a stand it wants to take for reasons of gender equity and justice.
Second, once a religious justification is used to promote a cause -- monogamy in this case -- what is to stop narrow-minded loonies from quoting the same books for whatever mayhem they have in mind? If the courts and law agencies start using religious justifications for secular causes, how can they uphold the Constitution?
There is no need to go down that slippery slope.
More here
Full Post
|
POSTED BY Sundeep ON Aug 13, 2009 AT 05:09 IST
Chand-Fiza did exactly what two specific Supreme Court rulings forbid -- bigamy by non-Muslims under the cover of embracing Islam. The Law Commission has merely recommend that the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and other statutory marriage laws of India should incorporate the SC-held position of the law. Tahir Mahmood, member of the Law Commission writes in the TOI:
Conscious of the religious sensitivities of Muslim society in respect of personal law, the commission did not touch upon misuse of the Islamic law on bigamy by born Muslims themselves, which is not unknown. Ignorant of the limited scope of its report, the Law Commission is being uncharitably criticised in Muslim religious circles. Members of these circles naively believe that their personal law, despite being distorted and misused in practice, is outside the powers and functions of all constitutional organs and advisory bodies of the state.
Seeing it as an inseparable part of Islam, they want all such organs and bodies to perpetually keep away from it. They are yet to appreciate the true position of Muslim personal law under the Constitution of India and its real place in the legal and judicial systems of the country. It will be in their own interest to acquaint themselves with the proper legal position in this regard. Till this day all constitutional and statutory bodies in India have spoken of Islamic law with respect and done their best to accommodate the religious sensitivities of the community. Persistently alienating these bodies through irresponsible criticism is an act of short-sightedness.
Read the full article in the TOI
Full Post
|
POSTED BY Sundeep ON Aug 12, 2009 AT 04:51 IST
Aijaz Ilmi in the Indian Express:
I walked over to the famous mosque. Unlike in India, the library within the mosque it had students reading different subjects, in a relaxed, easy manner. Girls in long skirts and jeans were praying in the same mosque.
It dawned upon me that in India the simplicity that following Islam should have is fast losing out to intolerance within our community. The clergy must unshackle us from the fetters of outward appearance, beard, and division by sects — and should, like the thought leaders in Egypt, focus only on modern education, to do justice to its followers.
More here
Full Post
|
POSTED BY Sundeep ON Aug 08, 2009 AT 16:42 IST
L'affaire Emraan Hashmi, where he said that he was denied a flat in a housing society only because he is a Muslim, is only the latest episode in the sad series of earlier such narratives. Salil Tripathi joins the debate in Mint:
If housing societies can frame rules about who can buy, can they make rules about who cannot buy? What if such exclusions are fuelled by prejudice, keeping out particular castes or faiths?
Singapore does it differently. There, the state does not want communal ghettos. So it requires that the ethnic composition in the flats it builds must be proportional—broadly—to the general population. Singapore can do it, being a city-state where four out of five Singaporeans live in government-built housing. But it is neither practical nor desirable to replicate such regimentation because it would violate an individual’s right to stay where he wants to, and another’s right to rent out property to whoever he wants.
But what if there is a persistent pattern to keep out some people? Can, or should, the state intervene...?
States keen to eliminate prejudice may want to intervene in cases of discrimination among private individuals. But look at our matrimonial ads—how can anti-discrimination laws be enforced while respecting individual freedom? That is the tough conundrum.
Also see: Tarunabh Khaitan's two excellent pieces on the possible legal responses: here and here
Full Post
|
POSTED BY Sundeep ON Aug 06, 2009 AT 22:08 IST
Hitch too isn't too thrilled with Obama's Cairo speech ("some of what he said was well-intentioned if ill-informed"):
Take the single case in which our president touched upon the best-known fact about the Islamic "world": its tendency to make women second-class citizens. He mentioned this only to say that "Western countries" were discriminating against Muslim women! And how is this discrimination imposed? By limiting the wearing of the head scarf or hijab.... The clear implication was an attack on the French law that prohibits the display of religious garb or symbols in state schools.
He goes on to quote "from an excellent commentary by an Algerian-American visiting professor at the University of Michigan Law School, Karima Bennoune who says:
I have just published research conducted among the many people of Muslim, Arab and North African descent in France who support that country's 2004 law banning religious symbols in public schools which they see as a necessary deployment of the "law of the republic" to counter the "law of the Brothers," an informal rule imposed undemocratically on many women and girls in neighborhoods and at home and by fundamentalists.
More here
Also See: on the same speech: B. Raman ! Arif Mohammed Khan ! Noam Chomsky
Full Post
|
POSTED BY Sundeep ON Jun 12, 2009 AT 22:27 IST
MJ Akbar is, as always, in great form when discussing such matters and here he joins issue with our man in Cairo:
Dear Brother Hussein,
I am certain about two things. I am a Muslim, and I live in this world. Now the uncertainties begin. On June 4 you gave what was heavily advertised as a major speech to the ‘Muslim world’. Does that mean that while every Christian believes in the divinity of Jesus, he can be legitimately and widely varied in his political interests, but Muslims must have both Allah and politics in common?
... The conflation of Islam and Muslims is precisely the kind of misconception that encourages pre-nation-state fantasies like the revival of a Caliphate. One might add that while every Muslim was deeply committed to his faith, political disputes among Muslims began with the election of the very first Caliph, Hazrat Abu Bakr. Muslims see themselves as a brotherhood, not a nation-hood. If Islam is sufficient glue for nationalism, why would Arabs be living in 22 countries? That should have been obvious while you were snacking on Arab cookies and Islamic lemonade in Cairo.
Read the full piece here
Full Post
|
POSTED BY Sundeep ON Jun 08, 2009 AT 04:29 IST
Sudheendra Kulkarni, LK Advani’s key aide, who was closely associated with the BJP election campaign, specifically the campaign of LK Advani, writes in Tehelka that if the BJP wants to win, it needs to rethink its approach to Muslims, Hindutva, the poor, the RSS, and itself:
At a broader level, it is high time the BJP seriously debated and decided what it means by ‘Hindutva’, and also what formulations of ‘Hindutva’ are not acceptable to it. True, the BJP must remain an ideology-driven party. But without clarity on what the BJP’s ideology is, the party cannot win the support of more Hindus, let alone the support of Muslims and Christians...
...As far as taking the BJP closer to the minorities (Muslims and Christians) is concerned, both confusion and indifference within the party are of Himalayan magnitude. The mentality of a large section of the party is so dogmatic that any idea of promoting the welfare and development of Indian Muslims, or of addressing their legitimate concerns, is quickly brushed aside as “appeasement”. In five long years after 2004, the BJP did not come up with a single worthwhile initiative which Muslims could welcome. Take the example of the Sachar Committee report.
...the party’s collective mind is suffering from a prolonged confusion about how to deal with issues relating to Indian Muslims. Those leaders who want to think and act innovatively know that they are prone to be quickly accused of following a “Muslim- appeasement” policy. The BJP’s Minority Morcha is a non-operational body, whose voice is heard neither within the party nor within the Muslim community.
The entrenched thinking within the BJP is that “Muslims never vote for us and therefore there is no need to think or do anything for them.”
Read the full piece at Tehelka
Full Post
|
POSTED BY Sundeep ON Jun 08, 2009 AT 02:14 IST
Some of the initial reactions to the speech:
Dr Zafarul-Islam Khan, President, All India Muslim Majlis-e Mushawarat (AIMMM):
President Obama has opened a new leaf with the Muslim World after eight long and agonising years of Bush presidency which sought a totally unnecessary clash with the World of Islam which shares with the United States of America many of its cherished ideals like freedom, brotherhood and equality. President Obama has been forthright and candid though he failed to acknowledge that while Iran has signed the NPT, Israel has not done so while keeping a huge stockpile of nuclear warheads. President Obama was rather mild on Israel and did not tell us what he proposes to do if Israel rejects peace with its neighbours and continues to subjugate Palestinians and occupy their land. President Obama’s plans for a new engagement with the Muslim World, especially through investment in education and healthcare, is welcome but one has to wait and watch what will be possible for a tottering American economy. President Obama’s announcement of a timetable for withdrawal in the near future from Iraq and Afghanistan too is welcome but we will believe it only when we see it happen. Close cooperation is in the interest of both America and the Muslim World. America can take a lot and benefit from the Muslim World through peaceful engagement. In general, Dr Khan remarked, President Obama has made a good beginning but only future will tell how far America is ready to go to mend fences with Muslims from Morocco to Indonesia after eight years of a totally uncalled for war on Islam and stupid talk of clash of civilisations.
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's Supreme Leader:
"The nations of this part of the world ... deeply hate America because during many years they have seen violence, military interference, rights violations, discrimination ... from America... Even if they give sweet and beautiful talks to the Muslim nation ... that will not create a change...Nothing will change with speeches and slogans."
Mark Liberman points out in the Language Log:
Instead of "wear the hijab", he said "wear the hajib". A "hijab" is a head scarf, while a "hajib" was a sort of vizier or chamberlain in Muslim Spain and Egypt. This was a normal and understandable sort of speech error. I don't expect much reaction, or even commentary — nor should such errors be a focus of political discussion, in my opinion. But can you imagine the reaction if the speaker had been the previous president?
Huffington Post says it got standing ovation while Roger Simon in Politico makes much of the bits that drew an applause from the crowd and those that didn't:
When Obama quoted the Koran — “As the Holy Koran tells us, ‘Be conscious of God and speak always the truth’ ” — or praised Islam — “Throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality” — he got applause.
But other lines, such as when Obama vowed to protect the American people from violent attack, were met with stony silence.
...And when the president talked about the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on America, he was met with only stares from the audience.
...Similarly, when Obama talked about “America’s strong bonds with Israel” and said that bond “is unbreakable” there was no applause.
...Obama’s speech was a complex one and it got a complex reaction. When it comes to speeches, you win some, you lose some, and sometimes you just move on. Obama did all of that in just one speech Thursday.
The NYT's Lede points out some of the dissenting voices in Arab blogosphere
Full Post
|
POSTED BY Sundeep ON Jun 04, 2009 AT 21:22 IST
After offering some useful suggestions to the BJP, Aijaz Ilmi concludes his piece in the Indian Express with what the party's hardcore would rather remain in denial about:
the courts will continue to ensnare the perpetrators of the 2002 Gujarat riots. But in public life perceptions of connivance are as important as the judicial verdict. The BJP at some stage will have to show remorse for the loss of numerous innocent lives both at Godhra and in the post-Godhra riots on Modi’s watch. The larger canvas of fast-paced development will always show large stains as a reminder. Grudging Kalawati’s neighbour Salma a chance to live with dignity would be a travesty.
Read the full piece in the Indian Express
Full Post
|
POSTED BY Sundeep ON May 30, 2009 AT 22:27 IST
Jerry Rao offers some advice to Sri Advani in the Indian Express:
In four states, you have virtually no presence and for that matter no allies to speak of. Your former ally, the TDP, has openly confirmed that they are not willing to risk losing the Muslim vote because of association with you. The position of the Trinamool is similar. The only way you can address this is to induct many more senior Muslim leaders into your party and to communicate on a regular basis that in fact in the BJP-ruled states your party is ensuring a steady improvement for Muslims both economically (income, jobs, etc) and socially (education, health indicators, etc). The Sachar Committee report helped the Congress immensely in West Bengal even if this was just an inadvertent result. The Muslims of West Bengal realised that after three decades of blindly supporting the Left Front, they had not gained much and in fact had fallen behind Muslims in other states. This hurt the credibility of the Left parties with the Muslim voter. Your colleague Narendra Modi should for instance hold six-monthly meetings with Muslim intellectuals, businesspersons and civic representatives and present a report card of how Muslims are progressing and getting ahead in his state. He should contrast his government’s performance with that of other states where Muslims get lip sympathy, not real attention. Such an effort along with dropping the Hindutva plank will in a three to five year period improve your party’s prospects immensely and make you attractive to allies old and new.
Read the full piece here. Meanwhile, a lot of chintan manthan happening here too -- it's the comments section that provides a very useful insight into the minds of the BJP supporters
Full Post
|
POSTED BY Sundeep ON May 26, 2009 AT 03:22 IST
Aijaz Ilmi in the Indian Express argues that "pushed into a corner, and treated either as a vote-bank or a punching bag, the Indian Muslim voted uniformly along similar lines as the rest of the country":
...in Kerala, speculations that controversial cleric Madani would help the LDF were wrong; the community comprehensively stuck with the Congress-led alliance, not wishing to be identified with a cleric of shady background.
...even in his Raigad bastion, Minister for Minority Affairs A.R. Antulay lost; his penchant for polarisation failed to cut any ice.
...The leader of the anti-nuclear hype, the BSP’s Shahid Sidiqui, lost in Bijnore — which has a 67 per cent Muslim-Dalit population
Full article: Speaking out, finally
Full Post
|
POSTED BY Sundeep ON May 22, 2009 AT 03:52 IST
After recounting what the anti-Muslim hysteria has done even to the moderate Muslim mind, Hasan Saroor, writing in the Hindu, also quotes her on the old housing issue:
Ms Azmi said not long ago she was quoted as complaining that she and her husband Javed Akhtar could not find a house of their choice in Bombay because they were Muslim.
“What I had in fact said was that I was not bitter about it because discrimination happens against everyone. They edited out that sentence and I was left sounding as a bitter Muslim complaining about discrimination — and this led to a huge controversy,” she said.
The controversy, however, seems to be based on quite a lot of personal experiences, two of which were recently narrated on Kafila by Sohail Hashmi and Zainab Bawa.
Tarunabh Khaitan had done a very useful piece on the possible legal responses here.
Post Script: In fact, going over the above and finding a reference, once again, to the excellent blog Law and Other Things, I find that he too had been following the moving Kafila narratives, and has done a very thoughtful follow-up post here. Do look at the the comments section as well.
Full Post
|
POSTED BY Sundeep ON May 08, 2009 AT 05:30 IST
Aijaz Ilmi, the chairman of the editorial board at the Kanpur-based Urdu newspaper Daily Siyasat Jadid in the Indian Express:
...Dar-ul Ifta, the fatwa-giving arm of Deoband’s Dar-ul Uloom spoke of the value of “neutral” voting in the elections. The spokesperson said that Indian Muslims must vote not on religious lines but as citizens of a secular democracy...Steeped in a volatile mix of anger and destitution, subject to being “suspect” for far too long, Indian Muslim communities are finally showing signs of fighting back against preconceived prejudices. When respected Ulemas start to speak out about secular traditions and democratic structures, a strategic shift based on community feedback is apparent. Whether this wave of positivity will turn into a tsunami of inter-cultural bonding is yet to be assessed.
More here
Full Post
|
POSTED BY Sundeep ON May 07, 2009 AT 04:43 IST
|
|
|
|
blogs
|
|
|
|
Muslims
|
|
|
|
|
BLOGGERS
K.V. Bapa Rao
Sundeep Dougal
|
|
|
RECENT TAGS
1984
26/11: Terror In Mumbai
Corruption
Elections
Faiz Ahmed Faiz
Media
poetry
Scams/Frauds/Rackets
Terror in India
Tributes
|
|
|
|
|
|
Go |
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
|---|
| | | | | | | | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | | 29 | 30 | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
|