Farzana and Me

Temporal #117,

I don`t get it. Who propels the Shahabuddins and the Bukharis ? I am not being
facetious here. I think the GOI has its own reasons to have these characters as
the front-end of the Muslims, but perhaps there are more subtle forces at play.

Stuka #123,

You`re right. There shouldn`t be a Muslim leadership, much as there shouldn`t be a
Black leadership in the US. But there is, and given the current climate, I doubt we
can wish it away. Given that, the question about the nature of the leadership still
remains. As Dost-Mittar said, why do the Asghar Ali Engineers and the Zakarias
(or even M.J. Akbar, who was a Congress MP) get marginalized and demagogues
like Bukhari (whom every thinking Muslim I know, seems to dislike) end up being
the public face of Indian Muslims in the secular media ?

Dost-mittar #118,

You`re right. A decade ago, hindutva-vadi Bengali journalists would be an oxymoron.
Just to be fair, though, Swapan Dasgupta is an opportunistic turn-coat who saw the
rising stock of BJP and decided to ride the wave. Pritish Nandy has essentially no
standing among the Bengalis - he seems to be largely content-free. None of these
people are considered opinion leaders in Bengal. The political discourse there still has
a dominant leftist element to it.

``...i don`t think there is a viable muslim leadership per se in india...and given the vastness and disparity doubt if there can be one...
``

Why should there be a ``Muslim`` leadership per se, or for that matter a Hindu one. It is unfortunate that the Indian people I agree with on social issues (Nasah etc) tend to also lean left on economic matters and the people I agree with on economic matters (Gujju Bania for one) tend to be fascist in the social era. Oh well, God Bless America.

temporal

I do have an audience larger than just myself :)

But I wont accuse you of lying again. Just of outright stupidity.

Your sister Farzana can do what she wants. (nasah, sorry about my earlier statement). I only highlighted what she has and has not done.

ps:

the lady will in due course refute them again...perhaps on another board if you care to bring it to her attention...and if she so choses to do...

care to focus on the larger issue?

#119:

keep repeating:)

you have yourself for an audience...

when you tire you can `research` through her rebuttals...

...t

nooralain #116

Temporal lied. I pointed out the lie. You, not I, called him a lier.

I will again rub it in to you and any Pakistani who chooses to lie on behalf of sister Farzana. Farzana DID NOT refute any of those pearls of wisdom, certainly not in any of her endless stream of articles.

I can say this without any fear of contradiction by Farzana`s brothers and sisters because I am right and I dont need to save face by acting falsely sanctimonious :)

temporal, ferozk:
I am glad that the discussion is moving away from discussing a personality!
Yes, I am aware that there are no monoliths among either hindus or muslims or, for that matter, in any other religious community. But I am somewhat of a voyeur of the political scene, though not an entirely disinterested one.
I see some movements taking place in India on the communal front that I find disturbing. I used the term `dominant thinking` in describing the muslim attitude; it may not be the attitude of the majority but that`s the one that comes across in both the secualr media as well as publications like millie-gazette. Whether we like it or not, these are the opinions of opinion leaders of muslims in India today while the voices of people like Asghar Ali Engineer and Rafique Zakaria are being marginalised.
I used the term `thinking hindus` because of the attractiveness of the BJP among urban and educated hindu middle class. A particularly revealing indicator is the rising number of bengali journalists -Pratish Nandi, Chandan Mitra, Swapan Dasgupta and others -toeing the hindutva line; this would have been unthinkable even a decade ago. They too are the opinion leaders in their communities. If there is a confrontation among opinion makers, can the confrontation among the masses be far behind?
To be honest, the intolerance of minorities per se does not bother me; what bothers me is the backlash it unleashes among the majority, because the inevitable result of majority bigotry is fascism which will surely destroy India. My remark regarding the intolerance of intolerance should be taken in that context.

plats8:

...i don`t think there is a viable muslim leadership per se in india...and given the vastness and disparity doubt if there can be one...

... find out who really propels the shahabuddins and bukharis as the indian muslim`s voice and what is their agenda...hint: it is not the GOI....

rgds,

t

rationalfaith. . .
while i take umbrage not only to you calling me a liar, but to calling my friend temporal a liar as well, i`m not going to argue with you because you don`t sound rational to me in the least bit.

people read and remember what they choose to, and what you choose to remember could be deemed as questionable as well. and what i remember right now is being asked not to discuss or cast aspersions on farzana`s personality any longer. if farzana was the chicken you so erroneously claim that she is, i can assure you she would not return time and time again. she is not as inhuman as you paint her to be.

you have time and time again cast aspersions on islam, on muslims, on anything that has to do with pakistan, and those have been unjust, and what we have here, once again is you casting aspersions that are not just. it is not really worth my time to try and have an open conversation with you or one that is free of belligerence. so continue to cling to whatever notions you have of your assured superiority and sense of rightness. . .time will tell just how real those things you cling to are.

Sadna #113,

How can you legislate ``respect`` ? Acceptance one obviously can legislate, to the
degree that it implies non-imposition or non-obstruction.

I do agree with what you say here about making religion a completely private matter,
and good to have you back at chowk.

Ferozk #107,Temporal #106,

You guys are correct in that Hindu and Muslim opinions in India cover the whole gamut.
I guess one of the problems is with the nature of the Muslim leaderhip, which is
taken to be indicative of the collective Muslim voice. I never understood why the govt chooses Imam Bukhari or Syed Shahabuddin to represent them - these are surely
not the most progressive voices around. But then, the regressive ones are the most
vocal in every country.

nooralain #71

You have repeated the lie that temporal conveniently invented in #70.

Farzana has refuted nothing. Not in her articles. When she has been challenged, like the chicken that she is, she has repeatedly resorted to subterfuge, everytime claiming that she didn`t mean what she said. Her next articles would again be dripping with such pearls of wisdom. That is the classic pattern that temporal should talk about.

What people read and remember are her articles, not her subterfuges, and `I didn`t means.`

Farzana has made all those statements and has REFUTED NONE OF THEM in any of her articles. Neither has she apologized for her statements, either in her articles, or in her stream of subterfuges.

HN
I agree with dost-mittarji wrt the `respect not accept` part.

But I don`t understand why the person you mentioned wanted to discuss HIS religious inclinations with you. Nothing has ever prevented him from getting together with likeminded people and having a bhajan mandali or taking out a temple procession in public - this happens all the time in India. Surely many of us have had the experience of having to study for exams through loud temple/church festivals or gotten caught in traffic for processions or had people solicit funds for public celebrations. If thats what his parents did, he can continue to do that, can`t he?

Religion should be kept to the private sphere/choice. The change which Hindutva-vadis are trying to bring in is, they want to take OWNERSHIP of/CORPORATISE individual religious practice/ inclination, ie make one`s religious inclinations(or lack of) their business.

Thats an UNACCEPTABLE intrusion into the most private of spheres, and the conversation you mention(if not among close friends) is one consequence of this. I am sure people across the border have had sufficient disasterous experience of going down that road, beginning with `Muslim` spotting, for us to be warned not to similarly slide to disaster via `Hindu` spotting, as members of the Sangh want.

Then there is the other extreme, if you will, of denigrating everything Hindu/Muslim, simply by definition. Thats not going to work in India. If one cannot denigrate a mother tongue language and get away with it, much less can one denigrate religious tradition and expect to get anywhere.

Much less can one take a person`s religious background as the sole reason for him/her to be always right. Its this underlying assumption on chowk which bugs some people I guess(I find it very off-putting).

#110 by HN
Since we are into anecdotes..

I had a muslim friend, middle-class, living in relatively cosmopolitan area of Bomay called Andheri. She was a recent dental college graduate and was doing some kind of aprenticeship with an established dentist in Dongri, a muslim ``muhalla``. She told me that although she would prefer to work in growing suburbs than Dongri, she was unsure about it being a muslim. Also, importantly, she found an older practitioner, from her community, and that was a relatively easy choice. This was in 1984.

So, why are very many people like your your ``simpleton friend`` cynical of the psudo-secularist? Especially the non-reporting commentrators? The communal rifts and muhalla-isation issue definately predates the current Hindutva politics. The secular commentrators were missing in action then. The problem posed then, was far more nuanced (as it is now in rality). However, now, the writers seem to relish a simplified hindutva demon to add masala to their stories. Nuances-Shuances.

re: harshreality # 77

Why is it that people misinterpret posts so damn easily? Harshreality ji, saminshah did not post that because he agrees with that ass harunyaha. He posted it to show the moral bankruptcy of the doctrine harunyaha follows.

Your attack was most uncalled for. Please, you ought to apologize to him.

Recently I met a young wife in Bangalore, who after working in a sericulture laboratory switched to journalism. After working in a small niche magazine, she has just moved to a mainstream newspaper. She introduced me to her husband, an accountant in a small firm. They did their journalism course after marriage together. He too had a great love for journalism. She made it, and he is staying put in his current modest job, and encouraging her to fulfill their common ambition.

From all accounts they are a typically middle class, Hindu family. At elngth, the husband, a emotional idealist I gathered, asked me an odd quesation. Why is it that if I talk about my religion, or show an interest in Hindu mythology, or go to temples, I am frowned upon?

I think he was trying to get me into a discussion where he`ll get to know a yes or no answer, and find out whether I am a ``pseudo-secularist`` or am I also one of those Hindus trying to be more modern by NOT criticisng those who read-into his normal life...the way his parents have lived for years...temple...tikka...etc...

I quote this incident to illustarte one single point. Whatever its causes may be, both Hindus and Muslims are overtly touchy with the very discussion of such subjects. And, here I am talking about the educated, urban, or simply those with greater opportunity to understand the differences compassionately. From all accounts, my interogator, was a simpleton more given to emotions than trudging miles on that arid territory called knowledge. His hurt, as I perceived, was yet not hate of Muslims...or anything remotely close to that. His fear was that ``intellectuals`` advocating secularism often tend to read so much into old, almost intenalised, customs ...that he is feeling threatened...insecure...

I quote an Hindu here, because, it might be a big mistake to imagine that all insecurity is the Indian Muslims` prerogative. It is NOT true that all Hindus are very triumphal, even if they do not support the BJP...or affiliated parties. Even they are feeling threatened, insecure....in their own small ways.

I am not reducing or trivialising the fear and insecurity of Muslims here. They are obviously more immediately threatened, because of political developments, the shrinking spaces to air and get redressals for their individual torments, they fear for the future that is seeming more and more anti-their community, and the shenanigans of the more strident Hindutva characters, and the media coverage they garner, is concretising their fear. And, make no mistake, it is a real danger. If one is from that community, then the danger is actually the heavy ball of steel that continues to sink in your solar plexus.

Now, as the contageon of fear spreads, it will breed more insecurity, more suspicion, more defensiveness. A nation with even say 20 percent of such people cannot but be hugely vulnerable to implosion. And sometimes, perfectly regular, non-communal Hindus, like this friend in my anecdote, react with greater stength to slightest view of that sympatise with victims. Because, he imagines, the carrier of victim`s perspective is the mother of all his collective social demons.

This armed neutrality between the two communities is worrying. It is in that context that I tried to initiate a discussion. I do know some of the discussion would have nothing to do with the point, but a lot of it seems to have concentrated on a fellow writer and a small band of her work being used to illutrate this point would add that much more relevance to the community at chowk.

re:#105 by dost-mittar
Excellent post.
I will have to take some more time to respond. But you have fired the first salvo. Expect some brickbats.
Sridhar