India’s Communal Gamble

Shahid Mian:

It seems Hindu hocus pocus is being bought and splashed around in the west also. The following is from a Canadian paper. Care to comment on the veracity of the following observations?

``The Lies of Oprah

FrontPageMagazine.com | October 16, 2001

ON FRIDAY, October 5, Oprah devoted her program to ``Islam 101,`` which, I think, was supposed to be a crash course on the Islamic religion.

I’m still confused.

One of the guests, Dr. Maleeha Lodhi, the Pakistani ambassador to the U.S., explained that, ``There is nothing in Islam that does not accord women equal rights and respect. Islam encourages women to participate and be a productive member of society.``

Another guest, Professor Akbar Ahmed, who served as the Pakistani Ambassador to Great Britain and is now the Chair of Islamic Studies at American University in Washington D.C., stated that there was a ``commonality`` between Islam, Christianity and Judaism in the ``emphasis`` on ``family life.``

Oprah didn’t challenge these statements.

After the program, I was very traumatized. I tried to synthesize Oprah’s show with everything I have read in the Qur’an – and in other Islamic texts. I failed miserably.

I’m very confused.

In the Qur’an, Surah 2:28 tells us that men are superior to women. Surah 4:34 commands a man to beat his wife as soon as she shows any sign of disobedience to his orders. The verse reads, ``As for these women, fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart and scourge them.``

The Prophet Mohammed was kind enough to leave no misunderstanding on this matter in the hadiths, which are his Sunnah (sayings and doings) as recorded meticulously by his companions. They are considered to have the same authenticity as the Qur’an by the overwhelming majority of the Muslim world.

In his hadith in volume 3:826 of the Sahih Al-Bukhari, Imam Al-Bukhari quotes Mohammed’s order to the husband regarding his wife: ``Hang up your scourge where your wife can see it.``

The Prophet, however, was loving enough to command that, according to Imam Kitab al-Nikah’s hadith No. 1850 in The Book of Marriage, ``you shall not slap her on the face, nor revile her, nor desert her except within the house.``

It’s a good thing that some contemporary Islamic teachers are a little more liberal on this issue. Abdul-latif Mushtahiri is a prime example. In his book, You Ask and Islam Answers, he instructs on page 94 that, while he is all up for a good wife-beating, it is a good idea to stop short of any broken bones or shedding of blood. He patiently explains that, ``Many a wife belongs to this querulous type and requires this sort of punishment to bring her to her senses!``

I’m confused.

Is this the ``family life`` that Professor Ahmed was referring to on Oprah in regard to the ``commonality`` between Islam, Christianity and Judaism? Or was he referring, perhaps, to Prophet Mohammed’s instruction to husbands, quoted in Imam Kitab al-Nikah’s hadith No. 1850, that, ``It is that you shall give her food when you have taken your food, that you shall clothe her when you have clothed yourself``?

I wonder what comment Oprah’s guests would make about Al-Bukhari’s hadith, in volume 3:826 of the Sahih Al-Bukhari, that quotes Mohammed saying that women are deficient in mind and religion? Is this why Surah 4:3 allows a man to marry up to four wives at the same time, so that the other three can make up for the deficiency of the individual retarded one?

When the Pakistani ambassador told Oprah that ``Islam encourages women to participate and be a productive member of society,`` was she referring to Surah 2:223, which states that a wife is a sex object for her husband? It’s quite a poetic verse: ``Your wives are as a tilth unto you, so approach your tilth when or how ye will.``

Aside from having more than nine wives, the Prophet Mohammed married six-year old Aisha and consummated his marriage with her when she was nine. Al-Bukhari’s Sahih Al-Bukhari is filled with references (i.e. vols. 5:236, 7:64, 7:65, 7:88) to this inspiring ingredient of Islam that all Muslims must accept.

I’m very confused.

Is Oprah planning to have an ``Islam 202``? Is that when she will ask her guests about six-year old Aisha? Or is it when she will recommend the book Rage Against the Veil – the heartbreaking account about how Islam mutilates the lives and souls of women and children? The book tells the story of Homa Darabi, an Iranian female doctor and human rights activist, who committed suicide, by self-immolation, in a crowded public square in Tehran in 1994 to bring awareness to the nightmarish realities that, for some reason, were forced into invisibility on Oprah’s ``Islam 101.``

Re: studebaker`s post on Zakaria brothers

Much of the Jehadi Muslim world does not like Fareed Zakaria. Pakistanis probably don`t like him much either. He is an Indian Muslim who does not come from the Farzana Versey school of thought.

Ironic isnt it that when Sigalph says something good about Pakistan (or myself or Aisha Sarwari), Rsaxena calls him an Islamic bigot and fundamentalist, but when Sigalph says something good about India, Sigalph becomes the Gospel of truth!

Hypocrisy and Double standards continue.

-YLH

PS all I am trying to say is that just like you have people like Shahid Akhtar Makhfi who tend to overdo the faults with India, there are people in Pakistan who overdo the faults of Pakistan. But this is a necessary process of growth.

I can pick up sentences from this article and I can then back them by amnesty International reports but I would rather not... no country is perfect, but we waste a lot of energy pointing fingers at each other...

So I appeal to the bigots from across the border ie rsaxena, gowardhan, mahesh G and especially the Bigot in Chief Jay thackerey to give up their diatribes against Pakistan and concentrate on your own country.

Eklavya

`I was frothing and foaming more about the articles written by some Pakistanis who never see any good in Indian secularism or in Indian democracy.`

Maybe if you could check the Pakistan-Obsessed Indian writers ,who out-number the India-Obsessed Pakistani writers by 100 to 1 and have nothing better than to Bash Pakistan, the Pakistani writers would start looking for something good.

Why the double standards?

I hope chowkwallahs will join me in condemning Mannyd`s post as the epitome of Hindu fanaticism and Bigotry. I can at this point disect the Vedas and indeed any other holy book that Hindus might have to show you why Islam is atleast 5000 times more egalitarian, but I`d rather not. I have no desire to indulge in exchanges of Bigotry. The truth is out there for everyone to see. So Oprah Winfrey is a liar. Maybe John L Esposito is a liar as well... even Bernard Lewis. The only epitome of truth are sinyasis from Hind...

sigalph235: ``The fundamental flaw with your analysis is that Indian Muslims are 13 %, at most, of India while Bengalis were 54 %, at least, of Pakistan. The yardsticks you use are intellectually not kosher.``

One should not become jealous or defensive if someone highlights the fact that other communities in the world have been or are being marginalized in the same manner (or more intense manner) as the East Pakistanis were in 1971. East Pakistanis do not have a monopoly on being the only community that was marginalized. As I stated earlier, in third world uneducated societies, every powerful group attempts to marginalize other weaker groups. Even within Bangladesh, this is going on, right now. As well as within India and Pakistan.

The only yardstick I used was, ``similarly extremely low percentages of Indian Muslims in Indian govt. positions`` in proportion to the total population. I did not mention any exact figures, but was speaking in terms of percentages. If you think that % wise Indian Muslims are better represented in the Indian govt. then East Pakistanis were in Pakistan, then please enlighten me (I could be wrong). Becuase I have never been to India, and am only basing my information on what I have read in Indian Muslim newspapers.

Mine was an attempt to highlight the marginalizations of the East Pakistani at a time of economic boom for Pakistan, and to highlight the marginilazitions of Indian Muslims at a time of economic progress for India. If your only aim is to accuse me of using intellectually non-kosher yardsticks than I am afraid nothing one says can please you. It`s a, ``damned if you do, damned if you don`t`` situation. Those, like me, who point out the mistakes Pakistan made with respect to East Pakistan (in no way to please you or any other Bangladeshis, but to just attempt to highlight Pakistani mistakes in an honest manner) are not intellectually kosher, if they highlight that other countries are now making similar mistakes with respect to other groups. While those who state that Pakistan did no wrong in East Pakistan are considered colonists.

I still stick to the fact that Indian Muslims are getting as marginilized, if not more, in the Indian society as East Pakistanis were in Pakistan. The fact that they are only 13% of the population as compared to 54% for East Pakistanis, actually adds to the marginalizations because this puts them in a weaker position than the East Pakistanis, i.e. it is much easier to dominate a 13% weak group than a 54% weak group. Also religious discriminations are far more intense than ethnic discriminations.

The second point I was trying to make is that since Muslims are spread out all over India, and not localized in one geographical area like East Pakistan, their discontentment will have a far higher impact throughout India.

The movie in which the Indian Muslim character facing baddie Hindu cops in Bombay during the riots is played by Hrithik Roshan was `Fiza`.
A review:
http://www.islamonline.net/English/ArtCulture/2001/09/article2.shtml

btw, this movie was banned in Malaysia, the reason given was that some Malaysian Muslims there were inciting violence against Malaysian Hindus on the basis of the picturisation of Hindus during the communal violence in the movie.

And btw, the Srikrishna report has been raised in Parliament several times, and has been an election issue apart from being given a lot of coverage in the press.

A patent ignorance of all this displayed by the author is analogous to a person writing about Indo-Pak talks and choosing to refer to the events of `71 while igoring the recent Agra Summit. This leads me to believe that the author cannot have been in India for very long(if he is in India at all), he seems to have recently migrated(if at all) to India from a country which doenot report Indian news in any authentic way and bans Indian movies. Now which country can that be? Let me think.

shankar bhai #36, ``now, now, please dont use sweeping generalisations. I`m just about as Pakistani as you are Mother Theresa:)``

I can`t help it. Don`t tell me you don`t read the interacts posted by most of the Indian interactors here?

Seriously, if I even criticize the color of grass in India, sadna sweets will pull out an article on how the grass is greener in India, and twenty internet references to try and prove it.

Saxena #44,

Yeah, I agree the author is one sided, but he has some valid points to make. One being that India is less secular in nature than it pretends to be.

You cannot deny that fact. Now don`t retaliate by bringing up a omparison of Pakistan with India to make yourself feel good.

Just think about it as an Indian concerned with India only.

sadna #57,

so now you`re turning to Bollywood trash to prove how secular India is?

pathetic

Those who perform the noble act of demolishing mandir or masjids etc are simply following the advice of the some oft-quoted punjabi pir.

Mandir dhaa dey masjid dhaa dey...etc

pur kissay daa dil naa dhanveen etc (whatever)

Such acts can only be carried out only by non-hindus,non-muslims or secularists.It is generally claimed by such that demolishing places of worship is ok because it has never broken any hearts anywhere.Laying claim to be a moderate & liberal has its privileges.It allows them to shift with the tide and always be at the right place at the right time.It is to such kind that the spoils of war go and it is they who are seem to be having fun-----but do they?

Drunkards,debauchers,gamblers,hookers,homos,porno-promoters and other insurers of throbbing healthy hearts know that such demolitions do not break any hearts.

There is another oft-quoted saying by some Panjabi:``Ghairat aannee jaanee shai vay,bunday nooN dhit honaa chaaeeda aye``....A very western concept indeed.

Re: ylh

``Ironic isnt it that when Sigalph says something good about Pakistan (or myself or Aisha Sarwari), Rsaxena calls him an Islamic bigot and fundamentalist, but when Sigalph says something good about India, Sigalph becomes the Gospel of truth!``

tsk tsk tsk...lying again, I see. Would you point out where I have called Sigalph that? Heck, let`s ask Sigalph if I have called him that.

He and I have disagreed on many things but never been disagreeable with each other. Mainly because he doesn`t lie like you do.

Re: ylh

``I hope chowkwallahs will join me in condemning Mannyd`s post as the epitome of Hindu fanaticism and Bigotry.``

Uhhh, genius, Mannyd did not write that. It is from that Canadian news magazine (FrontPage Magazine) and is not written by an Indian or a Hindu.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/columnists/glazov/glazov10-17-01.htm

Will Chowkwallahs join me in condemning ylh`s post as the epitome of idiocy?

Dear Shahid,

Welcome to Chowk, and I hope you would participate fully with the interacts that your article will have generated. I share your anguish about the deteriorating tolerance levels in India, as undoubtaedly other chowkies do. I find myself equally disgusted at the shameless saffron politics going on.

But in your post you make some staggering generalizations, and I must say, display a litle paranoia. The picture of hindu zealots overrunning the nation is hard to digest; it certainly doesnt gel with what I nkow about India and Inidans. I must conclude that you are one of the diminishing breed of what some chowkies have in the past called ``dispossessed Moghuls``. Thankfully most of this breed migrated to Pakistan a while ago, but some continue to remain in India, and continue to view the world through the ``lost glory`` glasses.

The question I want to ask is - where is your sense of balance? For a student of history, really, you show very little perspective. Its the typical victim complex, unable to assume responsibility for ones own situation. Of course I am not implying that the minorities` problems are all of their own making. We definitely have a problem on our hands, as you will certainly agree. Its a multi-faceted problem, and playing the victim and the siege mentality will not go very far in addressing it, IMO.

Its very important that thinking Indians constantly raise the issue, as you have done in your post, but your effort has been undermined by your lack of balance. Its a shame, cos what could have been a long overdue opportunity for stock-taking by Indians, will now stray into point-scoring. This is Chowk you know - it takes only a single opinionated piece of cr@p to throw the whole thing off, and I can see several in your piece.

Regards, xxabbu

PS i didnt know abt the green tile thing. What colour tiles do Pakistanis use? I have green tiles in my bathroon, and the pot is also green. Is that real bad?

Nice article.

A word on polygamy: Most muslims find it difficult

to hold on to one wife. Some can not afford even

one wife. Some relish more than one wife. The

religion is blamed for polygamy. This is unfair

criticism of Islam. Allah (s.w.t) allows muslims

to have more than one wife upto the maximum of

four, PROVIDED HE TREATS THEM EQUALLY. Is the

equal treatment possible? Of course not. This

is Allah`s way of asking muslims to be contented

with one wife, just as drinking alcohol was

prohibited by Allah (s.w.t). Muslims were asked

not to pray while they were intoxicated. This

led to the prohibition of drinking alcohol, since

muslims were losing prayers.