India’s Communal Gamble

Osama bin Laden Toilets, Green Latrines, and some peoples Islam

http://www.dawn.com/2001/10/21/letted.htm

Is this `civilization`?

The other day a a satellite TV channel reported to its viewers that a product is having a record sale in the US. It is a toilet paper which has pictures of Osama bin Laden printed on it. A sample was shown to the camera, and so was the process of its production.

President Bush and his friends are calling the tragic WTC incident an attack on `civilization`. True. But I want to know if it is this `civilization` that was attacked ?

Drawing human figures is not encouraged in Islam, let alone worshipping, respecting, hating or desecrating them. So it might not matter, whether you draw a picture or not, and to whatsoever use you put it. But, how would the `civilized` world feel and react if the pictures of Mr Bush, Mr Blair, Mr Sharon and others were treated in the same way?

The mass-production and the popularity of this item shows the mind-set of the people at large.

One wonders if such a `civilization` is worth promoting.

LAKIAREE

Jamshoro

`btw, this movie was banned in Malaysia`

How is this relevant to Pakistan?? Because I remember last year walking into PACE Mall Lahore, The Point Mall Karachi, and half a dozen other locations from the remote towns like Jauharabad and Khushab and being subjected to the horrible music of that movie `Fiza`.

Note to the Author:

As I have previously mentioned, the article makes the important point of highlighting Muslim concerns/insecurities in India today. Despite certain factual mistakes, which do not detract from the overall thrust of the article, it is important that Hindus do not subject Muslims in India to the tyranny of the majority -- something that even democracies can mistakenly commit. An example was the Shah Bano case which was elevated all the way to the Supreme Court in the `80s. The Supreme Court ruling -- i.e. to grant alimony to Shah Bano from her ex-husband in contravention of the Muslim Personal Law, could easily have been construed by the Muslims (especially the orthodoxy) as an assault on Muslim rights. The merits of the case notwithstanding, Shah Bano`s case and the Supreme Court judgment certainly had the potential to galvanize the orthodoxy. Although, I was originally opposed to Rajiv Gandhi`s decision to amend the law to overturn the Supreme Court judgment, I now believe that Rajiv did the right thing. It was certainly not an egalitarian decision, and was probably politically expeditious -- but, it was probably still right because Rajiv recognized that the impetus for change in the Muslim Personal Law should come from the Muslims themselves, and not from the outside, even if it has some short-term costs (e.g. denial of Muslim women`s rights, etc.).

I do hope that personal laws (Hindus, Muslims, Christian, etc.) are all put aside one day (as the Directive Principles of State Policy in the Constitution make it clear) -- and when that happens, citizens will be measured by the content of their character, and not by any religious affiliation. By the same token, the author should take note that it is ironical that a socio-political agenda that calls for denial of any rights to Shah Bano, is also simultaneously responsible for impeding the attainment of the full potential of the Muslim community in India. The balancing of these competing claims requires exceptionally strong leadership -- which unfortunately was more committed to creating Pakistan in the `40s, than addressing these basic issues. The Partition (accompanied by the flight of the N. Indian Muslim middle class to Pakistan) has left the community leaderless, a situation from which recovery has been very slow and is only now beginning to improve.

Re: Romair

``...a few factors in India that make the situation (of sizeable Muslims) more dangerous...``

There are a few factors that also make the situation far more stable, enriching and moderate:

a) Indians have a choice over spirituality and matters of faith -- helps to keep the lunatics in any religion from straying too far off the middle path (you are not a leader if there are no followers principle). Thus, no Talebans or Tikka Khans or Khmer Rouge. While at the atomic (individual) level, we may have fanatics who would embarras the Taleban, we will NEVER have the Taleban (or their Hindu equivalent) in positions of power. The system is stacked against the religious fringe elements

b) Intermingling and exchange of ideas is a source of strength -- not weakness -- from architecture, music to diplomacy. Exposure to our rich cultural heritage from all all faiths is a source of joy, not anguish. No where else in the world will you have the largest Bahai temple, the exiled spiritual head of the Lamaist Buddhist religion, the most stunning Islamic architecture anywhere, the oldest Christian Church east of the Suez, the most important temple for the Sikhs, the world`s largest Parsee community, a Christian community that outranks most European countries in size, and Hindu philosophy and architecture reflecting all its variety, co-located in the same country. While we certainly have our warts, we also have a tremendous inspirational heritage to make every Indian proud. We, unlike you, see the glass as being half-full, not half-empty.

c) We have more Muslims than the entire Arab world and Iran put together -- and we accord them greater political representation than the Arabs/Iran. I had a Palestinian (from Kuwait) room-mate in undergraduate college in India who lamented -- `we Arabs speak the language, follow the same religion, yet could not forge one nation, while you speak 19 major languages, have different religions, and yet are a united, democratic nation`. I had never, ever thought of India in those terms -- but when I heard him say that, it took a while for the implications to settle in. I felt PROUD. We still have a long way to go, but we will get there.

YLH

`` 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.`` The above is a quote from YLH post and I suspect he continues, with out the key strokes, `` what is the good of comparing the books, what is important is the practice of the religion, it is in that context I like to point out what pakistan has achieved. It is a country created exclusively on the basis of religion and what the institutions of pakistan have achieved is exemplary for the rest of the islamic world. I have to emphasise, there are individual flaws every where, but the legal and institutional frame work of pakistan that you have to focus on``

As a continuation of the same line of thought, YLH asserts, with the key strokes contribute by me, `` The infidel british never recognised the islamic treatment of women, so we in pakistan have legally sanctioned honour killing. As a glowing tribute to the equality in a country created for islam, a woman was killed in broad daylight in the office of a famous human rights activist, and the killer was not charged with any crime, simply because that will be illegal in pakistan. A couple of honour killing is the routine life task of any respectable pakistani, and that should be the proof enough of the essential equality of a religion that forms the foundation of pakistan. One should not forget that the supreme law is sheria in pakistan, and if the honor killing legality were at variance with sheria, sheria court would have asked for a review, like the case of riba, interset rates, in pakistan. Hounor killing laws upheld by the lahore high court, and not quashed by the supreme sheria courts are the testimony to the practical aspects of the equality in pakistan, and is in accord with the book, as interpreted and upheld by the scholars and judges of the pak sheria court.``

regards and best wishes to YLh with the typical ylh ending

jay pakistan,

jay sheria courts

jay jay

Re: Mannyd #42

Mannyd, you have posted the words of Jaime Glasov. From what I have read of him he has consistently attacked Islam - for reasons best known to himself. The `confusion` expressed in his article arises from selectively quoting the verses. I realize you are posting someone else`s article, but I get the impression that in posting, you are expressing similar confusion (I apologize if I am wrong) All the questions posed in the article have been answered many times over by very capable scholars and by people who have made it their life`s task to interpret the Quran.

A while ago I had posted an article, addressing these exact questions. I realized the instant I posted it that I had made a mistake. That was not the time for it. Because I felt the timing was wrong, I requested Chowk to remove the remaining three parts. Given the surge of interest in Islam, now may be the time to revisit the article and answer the questions you have posed.

There is only one requirement for understanding: and that is an open and unprejudiced mind and heart. It is also the most difficult requirement.

Islam is not a religion of soundbites. Therein lies the problem we face today. Islam is portrayed in a media that revels in soundbites and what they take from Islam in that form simply cannot portray Islam. This is the challenge for us : How to talk about Islam to a people who understand small bits of commentary?

Rather than reprint the article here, I`ll select a few passages, but I have to remain mindful of the fact that I am doing what the post has done: which is to selectively quote :)

Most people who question Islam, bring up the question of women, and also as you have done regarding Aisha, the girl he married when she was only 6. She had already been betrothed, that being the custom in Arabia at the time. She was then formally given to Mohammed (swth) in a ceremony in which she was not present.

But the wedding itself took place when she was 9, an affair that was conducted with the bare minimum of fuss. Aisha herself had no idea she was getting married, and continued playing with her friends on a see-saw. After the brief ceremony itself, the marriage made little difference to Aisha`s life. Because she was so young, she continued to live with her parents and not with our Prophet. The marriage was consummated after she reached puberty (and not when she was nine years old, as you have indicated).

Aisha continued her playful lifestyle with her friends. If her friends left when they saw Mohammed (swth), he would go and bring them back - it pleased him to have them there for Aisha`s sake. Westerners express shock at the age difference between the two, but they do not attempt to look at the time period these events took place. Keep in mind that present day society with careers in management or corporations did not exist back then. There are many of us today whose mother`s were of 13 or 14 years of age when they got married. Today`s changed world affords many more opportunities, so we have to look at reinterpreted customs with today`s ramifications. The way Mohammed (swth) treated his wives is remarkable. With his wives and family he was no longer the Prophet of God. Hazrat Umar objected to this: ``How you spoil them!``, he exclaimed.

An interesting example is Hafsah, who was was afraid of Umar, but because of the easy tolerance of Mohammed (swth) Umar said the Prophet (swth) had made her cheeky . Umar used to ask his daughter: ``What is the matter? Why are you so proud?`` Hafsah, a widow, was ill-tempered and not good looking at all. Umar made every effort to find a husband for her, but no one would marry her. In order to unburden him of his responsibility, the Prophet (swth) sought her hand in marriage. This homely (to put it kindly), ill- tempered widow always created a fight for the Prophet (swth) and always embarrassed him by her shouting. The Prophet (swth) adjusted to her and their whole life they lived together compatibly. He treated all his wives with these amazing qualities of great patience, courtesy and humility towards others. The westernized impulse to condemn polygamy stems from an inability to understand the social role it can play.

It is far too easy to abuse it, and then to point to the abuse of it.

The media is full of accounts of the `exploitive` or `abusive` nature of Islam. In starting to write about it I remembered someone in another board (I think it was sridhar) who asked about Hajj. Hajj brings to focus the aspect of women in a clear manner:

The Quran states: To Allah belongs the east and west -wherever you turn, you will be facing Allah.

When praying outside of Kaaba you must face it. Any structure except Kaaba directs north, south, east, west, up or down. Kaaba, an exception, is facing all directions while it is facing none. Toward the west of Kaaba there is a semi-circular short wall which faces Kaaba. It is called Ismail`s Hajar. Hajar means skirt, and this semi circular wall resembles a skirt. Sarah, the wife of Ibrahim had a black Ethiopian maid called Hajar, who was extremely poor and humble, to such an extent that Sarah did not object to her bearing a child for Ibrahim.

This semicircular area of the skirt of Hajar was the area in which Ismail was raised and the house of Hajar is there. She is buried near the third column of Kaaba. No one, not even prophets, are buried in mosques but in this case, the house of a black maid is located next to the Kaaba. There is a narrow passage between the wall (Hajar`s skirt) and Kaaba. For the Hajj to be accepted by Allah, the hajji`s must go around the wall (not through the passage). The hajji`s must touch this skirt when circumambulating the Kaaba, and they also circumambulate the grave of a black African maid and a mother.

The One Reality is all alone. He needs no one and nothing. Yet among all His creations on earth, He chose one, mankind, as the viceregent.

From among this humanity: a woman,

From among all women: a slave.

And from among all slaves: an Ethiopian maid.

The weakest and humblest of one of His creatures was given a place at His side and her grave is in the shadow of the Kaaba. The rituals of Hajj are a memory of Hajar. The word Higrah (migration) has

its root in her name as does the word Mohajir (immigrant). ``The ideal immigrant is the one who behaved like Hajar,`` said our prophet Mohammad (PBUH). Higrah is what Hajar did. It is also a transition from savagery to becoming civilized and from disbelief to Islam because in Hajar`s Ethiopian language her name means ``the city`, symbolic of civilization. The Hajj itself becomes the migration toward civilization.

Re: Shahid Akhter Makhfi`s article

Mr Makhfi,

Welcome to chowk.

Noone is saying that muslims do not face a lot of challenges in India. Such challenges are faced by other minorities, untouchables, adivasis and so on. What we have in India (what most countries in the neighbourhood lack)is a vibrant democracy, a free press and fundamental rights including right to free speech and practice one`s religion. Muslims first need to get out of this ``seige`` mentality. Your article speaks in a tone which conveys the feeling that Indian culture is synonymous with hindu culture. Let us look at the following sentence that you wrote:

``The Muslims too did not remain unchanged. Indian culture was bound to influence them and no king or courtier was an exception.``

Does it not convey to some of us that you think muslims in India are not historically part of India. It is as if you are saying that muslims are here by accident. Instead of always bemoaning your fate, why not make use of the freedom that you enjoy in India (something not seen in most muslim countries)to further the interests of muslims. What muslims need to do is to fight it out. Last 50 years has not seen even one muslim leader who speaks for India and who has muslim interest in mind. We only hear the likes of Shahi Imam now and then. Where are the muslim intellectuals?

You have written at length about destruction of Babri Masjid. It was a shameful thing to have happened. Muslim intellectuals, leaders should get together and present a common front to address this problem in a peaceful way. Let us not forget that all Hindus consider Ram as God and not just a mere ``warrior king whose exploits are illustrated in the Ramayana (the epic) exemplifying the manipulation of Hinduism for political purposes`` as you put it. How much ignorance of the epic and of the hero of this epic you show in your above statement? Millions of Hindus, rightly or wrongly, consider the birth place of Ram to be exactly at the place where the Babri Masjid stood. Is it not surprising that there is no big temple at such a holy site? There must have been, before it was destroyed by muslim rulers. The question now is: was that temple at the exact site where the masjid stood. This question can never be answered satisfactorily and the matter is with the court. Muslims in India can earn eternal gratitude and goodwill of hindus if they were to say that they will be happy to allow the Ram temple to come up at that site in deference to the wishes of the majority. After all SriRam`s message was one of peace and amity. Besides, this mosque as we speak, is not being used for namaaz.

What muslims fear is that this is only a beginning and more such destruction of masjids may come. They need to realise that a free court and a free press are powerful tools. Besides, millions of secular Indians are not in favor of such demolitions. But ask any average hindu, he will tell you the temple at Ramjanmabhoomi is special. (For records,I am strictly against building a temple at the exact site where mosque once stood).

rgds,

SRidhar

Sadna

Excellent points in your posts. The lack of response is…illuminating.

The article seems like a midieval opinion (we have agreed not to dignify this pov with the name “Mughal”)looking for convenient facts. (With inconvenient ones not mentioned, of course, integrity not being particularly valued here.)

Zafar

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Lot of things in India are not only to be taken with a pinch of salt but as freaks of nature

http://www.rediff.com/news/2001/oct/20rhino.htm

Water Rs 12 a litre, rhino urine Rs 250 a litre!

Krittivas Mukherjee in Calcutta Criminal minds will never cease to innovate. But, even in these times when one`s familiarity with crime is more than a passing nod, this one racket will leave most stumped -- making money from rhinoceros urine. Calcutta Police seem to have burst a flourishing illegal trade in rhino urine in the city zoo. The Alipore Zoo has two rhinos that are allegedly being made to relieve themselves `numerous` times a day for their `prized` urine which sells for as much as Rs 250 a litre. According to joint commissioner of police Raj Kanoria, rhino urine was being sold outside the zoo for its supposed curative powers by quacks. Gullible buyers are being told that rhino urine is an important ingredient in Chinese and Unani systems of medicine. The racket`s chain begins inside the zoo where unscrupulous elements make the animals urinate, allegedly by using drugs, at night. The urine is then collected in plastic bags and stored in the zoo staff quarters. According to figures provided by zoo authorities, the two rhinos relieve about 10 litres of urine everyday, but investigations now reveal that racketeers could be doping the animals to make them relieve more often. The packed urine is then sold as medicine for as much as Rs 250 a litre. Kanoria said police were trying to ascertain how the animals were being made to relieve so many times a day. The whole operation takes place around midnight near the staff quarters opposite the zoo. Police began inquiring into the racket after receiving complaints from residents of the area. Zoo authorities have said three staff members look after the zoo`s two rhinos. Police suspect the involvement of zoo staff in the racket. Rhinos are a protected species and sale of rhino urine is prohibited under wildlife laws. It is a popular belief that urine of tiger and many other animals, including rhinoceros, have medicinal value, but wildlife experts denied this. ``There is no medicinal property in the urine and faeces of the rhino, tiger and other animals. A section of unscrupulous people just make money out of such claims,`` according to wildlife expert Atanu Raha. Police have so far questioned four people in the case, but it was not yet known if any arrests had been made. Indo-Asian News Service Back to top Tell us what you think of this report

Reply Scout # 19

Scout

``why do Indians get so angry and hostile when faced with self criticism?``

Umm...I think it`s our egos (like everybody).

Also, the forum probably makes us somewhat defensive (again, like people from you know where).

In this case the article seemed somewhat unfair and presentation biased (selective use of facts, ignoring some important things, mentioning the colour of urinals in Delhi for chrissake...)

``i don`t think the writer hates India, he`s just expressing his take on some matters.``

I don`t think he hates India either - if he did I think he`d get a much less strident response. It`s the ideas behind the Indian union which he doesn`t seem to think much of (as shown by his selection of facts for presentation) and this is what excites Indians.

``if Indians are so intellectually `liberated` as they claim to be, they should take this criticism (albeit a little one sided) well.``

Who said we claimed to be `liberated`? We`re as chauvinistically nationalistic as Pakistanis any day!

I guess what it boils down to is:

Fact A would lead one to a certain inference.

Fact A and Fact B, considered together, would lead one to another inference.

So leaving out Fact B seems to indicate either malice, or ignorance explained by dishonesty about where the author lives, or both.

In saheb ka agenda kya hai?

Zafar

PS You get plenty of critical posts about India from Indians on chowk (Eklavya, Shankar, sometimes even me). Generally they don`t get a really hostile response from other Indian chowkies. Why are we reacting differently to this article? Can you see the difference?

one gets an impression from reading the article as if life is miserable for muslims living in india . as a muslim , i think it is far from truth .

In the past decade , there has been a defnitely rise in communal feelings across india but still the majority of the people are tolerant .

I have observed people link the rise of BJP to the rise in communal and anti muslims feelings . but it is not so the rise of BJP was more so because of downfall of the congress and inability of the congress to provide a leader of the masses . Even so BJP has so far failed to secure an absolute majority in the parliament and i doubt they will ever be able to do so . As of now people see them as no different from congress .

shahid saab mentions the color of toilet tiles and i think it is simply an idiotic point . please do refrain from stooping so low .

I agree the muslims representation in govt jobs is low but then i would ask him to quote the number of muslims with qualifications that have applied for such jobs ? i have seen muslim students in the first year of college had only one ambition to go to middle east or US . even before trying they think they will be disciminated in india . nowadays i see muslims organisations realising this mistake and helping muslim students to prepare for competetive jobs and exams . i am sure with sustained efforts inshallah muslims will make a mark in india .

i do agree that government is too soft on people like Bal Thackeray . but that is becaue it may lead to unnecessary riots and his followers making him a hero. This strategy has paid dividends now and his influence is slowly but surely diminishig . Also, the supreme court has taken voting rights from him . and i am sure srikrishna report will see the light of the day soon . i believe justice might be slow but it will be done .

People like Gowardhan and harimau maybe too vocal about their hatred for muslims but please do not assume it is voice of all indians .

Thanks

Problems facing Muslims in India are similar to those facing African Americans in USA— lack of education, poverty and distrust by majority community.

There is a small class of affluent Muslims; many are politically well connected, some run Bollyhood and some are successful businessman. This class sends their children to convent schools in India and colleges in US and Europe. The middle class includes white-collar workers and small businessmen who live in big and small cities. Many send their children to local language schools, as they cannot afford English language schools. As compared to the Hindu middle class, the Muslim middle class is very small. Most of Muslims fall in poor class who are working very hard just to get by. Many times, rich Muslims and religious groups use Muslim poor class to further their own agenda.

Muslims hold about 2% of IAS and IPS posts. This is mainly due to lack of education as these slots are filled using competitive examinations and there are no reserved slots for Muslims (however, 30% plus are reserved for so called ‘backward’ classes).

In engineering schools (IITs and others), Muslims student populations is less than 5%. Again, this is not due to discrimination but lack of preparation in middle and high schools.

A few Hindus unfairly regard Muslims as Pakistan sympathizers or worst. Muslim are no more traitors to India than Hindus are. The call of Jihad from Pakistan does not help Indian Muslims.

What India need is affirmative action for Muslims which will help them to get better educational and economical opportunities. RSS/BJP demagogy will not let it happen.

Secondly, Muslims should lean from American blacks about power of ballet box.

RE: Reply # 49 macgupta

[``Which alternate reality does the author live in ? ``]

Seems like there are alternate realities indeed.

The reality of the Indian muslims, terrorized, hounded, humiliated, brutalized and marginalized.

Then there is the alternate reality in which the Indian expatriates live, both the RSS sympathizers/chanda givers and the well meaning liberals. The RSS types believe that muslims and christians are getting what they deserve and the liberals think that falana commission and falani report will actual make a difference in the miserable lives of Indian minorities.

Quit whining about the Babri masjid criminals like Advani and his ilk.

The worst enemeies of -- Indian Muslims -- or as dost-mittar says -- Muslim Indians are -- their madrasas and the masjids -- and their bhukhari imams.Period.

I would be interested in knowing whether the following scares anyone in India? While it is common for everyday folk to attempt to threaten the places of worship of other religions, it takes on a whole new level, when the ruling party makes such a claim. For example, I would get very wary, if Musharraf were to get up today, and state at a corps commanders meeting that Pakistan needs to tear down a temple. Even Fazl-ur-Rahman doesn`t make such statements.

This is not an attempt to get into a, ``we are better than you,`` contest (to avoid that, lets assume from the get-go that Indians are better and more civilized than Pakistanis). However, I am interested in why Indians seem so concerned about religious extremism in Pakistan, but not too concerned about the changes in their own society (which will have far larger negative and violent consequences, in my opinion).

``Back to Ayodhya

At a Special Session, the BJP declares that it is poised to forge ahead with its own agenda, despite the compulsions of coalition politics, reports Venkat Parsa

New Delhi, October 21

The BJP adopted an important resolution, which brought on board both the Ayodhya issue and the party decision to go nuclear......

The BJP resolution signalled the party`s resolve to press ahead with a paradigm shift in the national policy-framework. Long-cherished policies like secularism and nuclear disarmament get short thrift......

Significantly, the BJP National Council raked up the Ayodhya issue. Union Home Minister L K Advani spoke highly of BJP`s role in leading the Ayodhya agitation. The BJP National Council adopted a resolution on the occasion, justifying the Ayodhya agitation and eulogising its role in shaping the party`s future......

Union Home Minister L K Advani was highly vocal on the Ram Temple Card and defended the decision of the ruling BJP to give an agitational thrust to the Ramjanmabhoomi issue, as part of the program of cultural nationalism. But for the Ayodhya agitation, Advani said, the BJP would not have grown to its present position.....(Tehelka.com... http://www.tehelka.com/channels/currentaffairs/2001/oct/21/ca102101jubilee.htm)

A few thousand unemployed youth burning American flags, behind Fazl-ur-Rahman is one thing. The Prime and senior ministers of an elected govt. making the above statements, in a country with 140 million Muslims is another. Since I do not live in India, I am not too effected by the social changes in India, but just for educational purposes, would like to know whether the above scares anyone in India?

Any objective comments from Indians (specially Indian Muslims) will be appreciated.