AMU at the Crossroads

Zafar,
AMU should not be a minority institution. It wasn’t one earlier but always had a large number of Muslim students. Muslims in this country have to pull their socks up and start competing, reservations have not helped the dalits or the obc’s. Why will it help Muslims. In today’s India there are great opportunities and great challenges. Its up to us to take advantage of these opportunities.

Regards,

Faruk

Zafar,
AMU should not be a minority institution. It wasn’t one earlier but always had a large number of Muslim students. Muslims in this country have to pull their socks up and start competing, reservations have not helped the dalits or the obc’s. Why will it help Muslims. In today’s India there are great opportunities and great challenges. Its up to us to take advantage of these opportunities.

Regards,

Faruk

Zafar sahab,

Here`s the thing:

Considering that the percentage of muslims in non-professional courses has been around 80-85% and that in professional courses (Med, engg, MBA) aroubd 60-70%. So, what then was the need to introduce 50% reservations last year? Shut out non-muslims altogether? But that can`t happen. Also, what were you thinking? That non-muslims who were denied admission won`t approach the courts? Please remeber that the University act of 1981 (that made AMU as an minority institution) has an inherent contradiction:
Section 5 (c) of the AMU (Amendment) Act 1981, empowers the university to ‘‘promote especially the educational and cultural advancement of the Muslims of India.” At the same time, however, section (8) of the same act categorically says that admission to students should be given irrespective of religious considerations.

In light of this, and a previous Supreme court ruling, why inititate such a stupid move?Stupid advisors? Too much reliance on Arjun? Hum Turram Khan hain, sabki haath mein aa jaygi!!!!

As an alig, I do think that AMU has a special status, including minority status. However, reservations on the basis of religion are not a part of the constitution, yet! Naseem Ahmad and Arjun Singh have not done anyone a favor in this matter, least of all AMU and the muslim community.

Regards,

PS: Please leave tongue-in-cheek to Woody Allen.

what is mine is mine and what is yours is also mine because we are the majority -- the tyrany of the majority -- in which the majority should own the minority..

.....the goddam legalistic Indians.....they don`t want anything to belong to the minorities except their, musjids Immambaras and their depressing madarsas.......and then the complain that the backward Muslims are too hooked to their madrassas.....

...why are indian muslims such whiners??...be it the writer of this article or the editor of this site or the indian muslim representative on chowk salim chauhan...whine... whine... whine...

(1) It is true that the muslim leaders have not prepared the majority population for a meritocratic society. There is politics invovled here, you should know having gone to AMU. The Muslim politicians use the Quran and foster ultra-conservative feelings in the Muslim community to win their vote. As a result, the majority of uneducated Muslim community, which have a large presence in U.P. would rather send their children to Mudrasas than to schools. The same politicians will then use these up and comings as a sign that not enough is being done to educate the Muslim community. This then yields its hands to the Indian affirmative action.

(2) This, however, should not serve as any justification for a pro-Muslim affirmative action. Take for example the following situation: you or one of your loved one is on their death-bed needing a doctor. Who would you, you being a Muslim, would rather go to a Muslim who was given the MBBS seat because of being a Muslim or a non-Muslim who was given the seat because of their merit? I certainly would pick a person based on their merits as someone with merits has proof of their ability the other might only have proof of their minority status. This is not to say that people of merit do not claim that minority seat, but such individuals also have well enough merits to compete with the ``Hindus``.

(3) This only goes to justify that affirmative action AT THE SECONDARY EDUCATION LEVEL OR PROFESSIONAL LEVEL is never the best way to promote education. The education must be promoted at the grass-roots level. THIS IS THE TRUE ROOT OF THE PROBLEM.

(4) The problem is in no way shape or form related to AMU. AMU was never a minority institution like Faruk said.

(5) I standy by Allahabad High Court`s decision.

(6) ``The judgement has sent shock waves....`` You should be a little bit more careful when choosing your words. The ``shock waves`` was nearly a front to the politics of gaining the ``Muslim`` vote. I have witnessed numerous of such ``shock waves`` having lived in Allahabad. Even the smallest change which can be given a negative outlook is done so for the sake of politics. Perhaps we on this web-site should be a bit more discriminative in our discussions.

(7) I hope AMU has a bright future. It has always held its ranks among universities in U.P.

(8) You were also a bit harsh with the ``few singers....`` about Bollywood. Bollywood, if anything, has ample Muslim actors, actresses, singers, composers, and etc. There aren`t just a few but a plethora of Muslim stars. Arguably they are more famous than their Hindu, Sikh, ....etc counterparts.

(9) With this article, I question, how much integration you actually wish for? I was actually in Singapore during the Diwali/Eid time and it was amazing to see both being celebrated back to back in neighborhoods in tranquility. There was integration and respect between the two communities. What you ask for, it seems, is for the Muslim community to rise distinctively as community. To what degree is this communalism, you wish to incite, beneficial or injurious to India`s health is an entirely different issue.

(10) I do not support affirmative action at ANY SECONDARY EDUCATION OR PROFESSIONAL LEVEL. The only way to level the playing field is via primary education which should be available for everyone.

Vikash

In all this talk about the minority status, the effect of reservations on AMU has been ignored. If non-muslims are shut-out from competition or severely handicapped in so doing, AMU will lose the best and the brightest from the non-muslim community. Over time, it will lead to a decline in the standards and reputation of the university. If this happens, the best of Muslim students too will begin to shun it, turning the AMU into a Muslim ghetto. I dont see how any well-wisher of the university would want that.

And there was no need to put ``unconstitutuional`` under quotations. If the HC says so, it is unconstitutional unless the SC decides to overturn the decision.


nasah:
``.....the goddam legalistic Indians.....``

...And thank God for that, because without the law, no one, esp. minorities, have any protection in India.:-)

Another point...

I believer that the courts can declare AMU as a non-minority institution because it is almost 100% funded by the Indian government. I wonder if the same situation would apply to a minority-funded institution.

Visit the AMU campus during an India-Pakistan match and observe which side the students are cheering for. Its obvious , isn`t it. And the bloody disgrace is this bunch of anti-nationals are given 100% by the government of India. The honest cow worshipping polytheist hindooo kufr tax payer funds the education of these terrorists , and what does he get in return ? IEDs in his markets , RDX in his kid`s school buses etc.

Zafar
I studied in a ``sarkari`` school, and AFAIK, my 12th board exam papers had only a role number field and didn`t have a religion column.
I could also get into an IIT, and there too there was no religion field in entrance exam paper. Recently a rikshaw puller daughter got selected to medical school in Maharashtra. My colleague and room mate in Tata`s graduate engineer hostel was a Christian who graduated from Vellore (not a minotiry college). Another colleague was a muslim girl who graduated from Delhi college of engineering.

Why a ``minority`` institution is necessary to ensure education of minorities? I would understand reservations till 12th grade to ensure that any social hesitation (inherited through parents) in accepting and intermingling with other groups/religions is overcome. Reservations at higher level hinders motivation to excel. Higher education should be based on merit. That is only way to motivate all to learn.

Ideally, AMU, after Partition, should have been packed off to Pakistan, and the building given away to any Hindu, Sikh or Jain college or university uprooted from West Punjab and Sindh on quid pro quo basis. Thanks to our secular establishment, AMU did not exhaust itself in the making of Pakistan. ``The university (AMU) tarana (song) does not contain a single word in praise of India but it glorifies such things as the evenings of Egypt and the mornings of Shiraj. The university flag has greater resemblance with the flags of Muslim countries, with moon and palm tree stamped on it, than with that of India.`` (Aligarh Muslim University and Muslim Politics by Dr SS Gupta, 1992, p 79) Syed Ahmed Khan, according to MJ Akbar, ``Consciously or unconsciously, created the groundwork for community-based politics, with all its attendant consequences.

Full text of the article:

AMU`s alienation is historical

Balbir K Punj


On January 5, a two-judge division bench of Allahabad High Court ruled that Aligarh Muslim University is not a minority institution. Chief Justice AN Ray and Justice Ashok Bhushan quashed the review petition filed by the UPA Government and AMU, challenging an earlier single-judge verdict of same purport. On October 4, 2005, Justice Arun Tandon had observed that AMU was not a minority institution and thus AMU Amendment Act, 1981, enacted by the Indira Gandhi Government, was `unconstitutional`.


The controversy over the minority status of AMU was sparked off by HRD Ministry`s notification of February 25, 2005, to reserve 50 per cent seats for Muslims in post-graduate courses.



The UPA Government`s move, clearly aimed at courting Muslim votes, had a prequel in Ms Sonia Gandhi`s visit to AMU on December 14, 2003. Addressing a seminar on the subject ``Jawaharlal Nehru and Nationalism``, she alleged that the NDA Government was ``targeting minorities, distorting history and subverting institutions of excellence.`` She aptly described AMU as a historic institution and ironically called upon ``all secular and progressive forces`` to join hands, to defeat those who ``subvert our constitutional values behind a reformist veneer.``



The AMU is indeed a ``historical institution`` but this history makes the Congress ,go into a denial mode. ``The official history of the Congress``, informs historian RC Majumdar, ``denies that the Muslims were opposed to the Congress.`` It is obvious that Congress`s present attitude towards this `historic institution` will prove the maxim, ``Those who don`t learn from the mistakes of history are condemned to repeat it.``



Aligarh Muslim University, established as Mohammedan Anglo-Oriental College (MAOC) by Sir Syed Ahmed Khan in 1875, was never merely an academic institution. It was a characteristic politico-intellectual movement of the Muslim community in the aftermath of the 1857 uprising that lasted till partition of India and continued thereafter. Moreover, it was the epicentre of the ideology of Muslim separatism and hatred was nurtured with active support from the British under the policy of `divide and rule`.



The protracted disintegration of the Mughal Empire (1707-1857) and the advent of the British was perceived by Muslims not merely as a political but also a religious and civilisational problem. One of its fallouts was the Wahabi Movement inspired by Shah Waliullah (1703-1762), who invited Ahmed Shah Abdali to invade India in 1761 to restore Islamic rule. Waliullah`s son Shah Abdel Aziz (1746-1823) declared that India had ceased to be a Dar-ul-Islam (House of Islam) and become Dar-ul-Harb (House of War).



Thus it was incumbent upon Muslims of India to either vanquish the British, Sikhs and Marathas in war or migrate (Hizrat) to lands where Islamic rule prevailed. But 1857 proved the futility of armed confrontation with the British. Those who remained loyal to Wahabism even after the catastrophic experiences of 1857 like Muhammad Qasim Nanauti and Rashid Ahmad Gangohi, set up the Islamic Madarsa (Dar-ul-Uloom) in Deoband in 1867. They responded to British takeover of India by cocooning themselves from the rest of the world.



Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, who had won the British confidence because of the help he rendered to the British during the 1857 uprising, started working towards bringing about a division between Hindus and Muslims. Simultaneously, he sought to identify Muslim interests with that of the British Empire in India. He advocated that Muslims gain mastery over symbols of modernism like the English language, science and technology.



But while talking of modernising the orthodox Muslim society, Sir Syed did not seek to align Muslims on the basis of universal principles of peaceful co-existence, tolerance or democracy. He successfully persuaded the community to look at the Empire as their patron and Hindus as a looming threat to their existence. He shrewdly reversed the pre-1857 hostile relationship between Muslims and British and brought them together against the Hindus. His action bespoke of the American maxim, `If you can`t beat them, join them`.



Sir Syed came up with a theological explanation to justify this alliance with the British. He said that British (Christians), like Muslims, were `People of the Book`, whereas Hindus were infidels. He ran a tirade against nascent the Congress by dubbing it a ``Hindu organisation`` that Muslims must eschew. He made British and Muslims convenient allies and succeeded in alienating the latter from rest of the country.



First through the `United Indian Patriotic Association` (established in 1888), and later through The `Muhammadan Anglo-Oriental Defence Association of Upper India` (established in 1893), Sir Syed and his ilk continued to oppose the Congress and `strengthen British rule in India`. His influence on Muslim was so deep that very few from the community joined the Congress in the freedom movement. Not a single Muslim League member ever went to jail. When Jinnah dubbed the `Congress, a Hindu party in 1940s, and saw Hindus and Muslims as two different nations he was being less than original. The founder of Aligarh College had said that long ago.



``Is it possible``, he said in his speech titled One Country, Two Nations delivered at Meerut on March 16, 1888, ``that under these circumstances two nations - the Mohammedans and the Hindus - could sit on the same throne and remain equal in power? Most certainly not. It is necessary that one of them should conquer the other. To hope that both could remain equal is to desire the impossible and the inconceivable.



At the same, time you must remember that although the number of Mohammedans is less than that of the Hindus, and although they contain far fewer people who have received a higher English education, yet they must not be considered insignificant or weak. Probably they would by themselves be enough to maintain their position. But suppose they were not.



Then our Musalman brothers, the Pathans, would come out as a swarm of locusts from their mountain valleys, and make rivers of blood flow from their frontier on the north to the extreme end of Bengal. This thing - who after the departure of the English would be conquerors would rest on God`s will. But until one nation has conquered the other and made it obedient, peace cannot reign in the land.`` (100 Best pre-Independence Speeches 1870-1947, Harper Collins India, 1998, pp 20-21)



``The university (AMU) tarana (song) does not contain a single word in praise of India but it glorifies such things as the evenings of Egypt and the mornings of Shiraj. The university flag has greater resemblance with the flags of Muslim countries, with moon and palm tree stamped on it, than with that of India.`` (Aligarh Muslim University and Muslim Politics by Dr SS Gupta, 1992, p 79) Syed Ahmed Khan, according to MJ Akbar, ``Consciously or unconsciously, created the groundwork for community-based politics, with all its attendant consequences.



It is no surprise that his college at Aligarh became the intellectual cauldron for the ideas which later created Pakistan. He himself articulated the arguments which became constants in discussion about Muslims till 1947.`` (Nehru: The Making of India, Roli Books, p 17)



Ideally, AMU, after Partition, should have been packed off to Pakistan, and the building given away to any Hindu, Sikh or Jain college or university uprooted from West Punjab and Sindh on quid pro quo basis. Thanks to our secular establishment, AMU did not exhaust itself in the making of Pakistan.



Sir Syed Ahmed Khan`s policy `if you can`t beat them, join them` continues to guide Muslims in partitioned India. Like Sir Syed declared British, the earlier adversary for Muslims, as `People of Book` and hence worthy of alliance, Muslims in independent India declared their earlier adversary Congress, as `secularists and worthy of friendship. The objective, in both cases, was to thwart any nationalistic resurgence.

``
``.....the goddam legalistic Indians.....``

...And thank God for that, because without the law, no one, esp. minorities, have any protection in India.:-) ``(DM)

I know -- dost miitre ji.....I know....and thank God for that.....:) .....I know it`s a double edged sword that cuts sharper on the minority side...... and thank God for that.

I know in legalistic India -- minus the goddam -- any 100% government funded institution doesn`t belong to 18% minority....goes to 80% folks....how naturally fair!

now this is what is called in vernacular -- panchon angulian ghee mein and sur karhai mein for the backward majority.....translation: the head I win and the tail u lose.....a permanent affirmative action for the poor opressed majority.......:)

I consider affirmative action in education to be good social policy but ruinous as politics. This appears to be one of those cases- Arjun Singh overreached himself and ruined whatever legal knife-edge AMU had been traversing between being a minority institution and not being a minority institution.

gujju/indian007: what`s your e-mail address...I need a trace run from India to a server here..

Re nash#4,12
The reservation at AMU was introduced by Arjun Singh to gain Muslim votes. It is an old political trick, it alienates the Hindus and does not do anything for Muslims. The number of Muslim students was more than 50% to begin with, what will the reservation achieve? If by virtue of the congress machinations the number of non Muslims is reduced, it will hurt the instructions reputation. The caliber of the graduates of this university will always be in question.


Regards,

Faruk

try mohammed_akhtar_india@yahoo.com

haha