MG
I have recently read a recent issue of MG. Being a Muslim I am proud
of you. MG is indeed a progressive step especially as a Muslim journal in
India. I am happy to find that articles of eminent writers like Wahiduddin
Khan and Syed Shahabuddin find place in your journal. I suggest you to
publish a well organized daily. It is very essential for Muslims in the
current Indian context.
Shafeeq EP, Trippanachi (P.O), Malappuram 673641
The Milli Gazette is the only authentic newspaper with in its vast
knowledge and information.
Dr Khan Akbar, Mumbai drkhan248@hotmail.com
Be more balanced
[I will] appreciate more balanced news coverage. In my opinion,
efforts to go back to many centuries will certainly fail. A nation must
always come first then any other consideration including religion.
Joshi pj44@usit.net
More South news, please
I am glad that MG represents the hopes and aspirations of Muslim India. It
is gratifying that your esteemed fortnightly maintains the standard and
language expected of a leading publication. Why don’t you consider
publishing something more about South India especially Kerala Muslims who
constitute about one fourth of the population of the state. May Allah the
Almighty help you ascend greater heights.
Dr M Abdul Aziz,
Director, Ideal Islamic College, Calicut
Misconceptions about Iran
I have just returned from Iran having spent three weeks on behalf of
Impact International to write a series of articles on social, cultural
& political developments in Iran. Your comments ('West plotting
against Iran', MG, 1-15 August 2001) that 'the call by Revolutionary Guard
chief was the most specific by a member of the ruling circle to oppose the
effort by Iranian President Mohammed Khatami to restore diplomatic
relations with Israel' is incorrect. Neither President Khatami nor any of
his supporters in the reform movement support this cause. The debate in
Iran is about the rule of law and accountability in the Islamic political
system. The Conservatives insist that the Valie -faqih should be
accountable to God alone while Reformists hold the view that all holders
of public office in an Islamic State should be accountable to people.
Dr. Ghayasuddin Siddiqui
Director, The Muslim institute, London
drsiddiqui@talk21.com
Editor: We are sorry
for this oversight. We know that Iran is staunchly fighting against the
Israeli gangsterism on various levels and in all international forums.
Gandhi & Muslim freedom fighters
Apropos of Manzar Imam’s article about madrasas (Aug. 1-15) it would
have been better had it been shown when and where Gandhiji had lauded the
Maulvis of madrasas because there appears to be much conflict. I have read
in a Gujarati book published in 1940 that has mentioned on p 140 of
History of Congress that Gandhiji had, during a meeting at Dr Ansari’s
house, humiliated the imprisoned freedom fighter Maulivis calling them ‘socially
dead outsiders.’
S Akhtar, Khanpur Deh-392 150
Syed Shahabuddin
I was shocked to go through the letter of Mr Afzal Usmani entitled, ‘Syed
Shahabuddin’ (MG 16-31, July). The charges made by the writer against
Syed Shahabuddin seems to be outcome of his ignorance. I feel it is not
Shahabuddin who kept the community in dark on the Babri Mosque as alleged
by Mr Usmani but majority of the community is itself responsible for being
in dark. I dare to say that we lack interest in reading, subscribing
dailies and periodicals and reacting to a particular situation. May I ask
Mr Usmani about his own contribution in this regard?
Syed Shahabuddin is often blamed by opportunist Muslims and communal
Hindus because he is a force himself. I have not seen any other Muslim
leader or intellectual who is opposing and exposing Hindutvites with such
force as Syed Shahabuddin. I agree and Mr Usmani should also agree with
Sayid Hamid’s comment that, ‘Some years ago Syed Shahabuddin was the
best to lead (Muslims). But people did not support him’ (MG, 1-15 July).
According to Mr Usmani himself, he was very young when he first heard Syed
Shahabuddin in 1989 in Shamsad Market. It will be interesting to recall
what upto?’ He writes that, ‘After Shahabuddin left the Janata Party
to set up his own Insaf Party, he began to bargain with the major
political parties. He put forward four demands before them which included
Ayodhya and a judicial inquiry into the Hashimpura killings’ (The
Patriot, November,25, 1989). It means Shahabuddin did not bargain for a
ministerial position or any other position of power but for community’s
large interest. Has Mr Usmani courage to sideline his own wishes and
comforts for the community? Accept that the fault and guilt lies not with
Shahabuddin but with some black sheeps of the community.
N. Jamal Ansari
4/1083, Sir Syed Nagar Aligarh-2
Holy cow and beef eating
The recent intimidation of the historian of Delhi University, Prof.
D.N.Jha for his academic work, 'Holy Cow: Beef Eating in Indian Dietary
Traditions', is yet another instance of the growing intolerance and
stifling of democratic and liberal space in the country. A demand has come
from some individuals to arrest Prof. Jha for this work of his.
Here one has to distinguish between the academic work and the ideological
contributions. The religious sentiments do require to be respected; we
also need to be better informed of our own society and culture. This book
is a serious work, referenced and based on impeccable sources. It does
demolish the myth that cow was the object of worship all through, it does
show that beef eating was a common practice not only in Vedic times and
others but also that even today there are number of communities within the
pale of Hindu traditions who consume beef. In a way this just elaborates
the works of earlier scholars of the repute of Bharat Ratna P.V. Kane, who
in his masterpiece on History of Dharmashastras shows that Vedic people
ate beef. With the rise of agricultural economy Buddha appealed for
bringing a stop to the animal sacrifices and set the trend for
preservation of cattle wealth. Some of these responses and reactions
assumed the form of worship of cow amongst a section of Hindus.
Dr Ram Puniyani
EKTA, Mumbai bmrrpia@cc.iitb.ac.in
What I and my drum say?
Talking to a Muslim delegation, Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee
said that the question of associating the madrasas with Pakistan's secret
agency, ISI’s activities does not arise. Vajpayee government had formed
a committee of group of ministers consisting of home minister LK Advani,
Foreign Minister Jaswant Singh, former Defence Minister George Fernandes
and Finance Minister Yashwant Sinha. Though this committee in its report
described Arabic madrasas as centres of terrorism, anti- national and a
danger to the integrity of the country, it failed to give any proof of its
claim.
I want to ask the prime minister and the present government: how correct
are the newspaper statements of some Sangh Parivar, Shiv Sena , Bajrang
Dal and Vishwa Hindu Parishad, military training sponsored under saffron
flag and repeated declaration of Bajrang Dal that 30 lakhs of Hindus are
being trained in arms handling and that they have full cooperation and
backing of the government. Do such activities not endanger communal
harmony and are these steps not anti-national? Can all these things be
allowed to Muslims, Christians, Sikhs and other minorities? All these
movements against Muslims and Islam in India are being organized by Jews
and Sangh Parivar. If Mr Vajpayee is correct in his statements, he should
immediately get all objectionable matters in the GoM report removed and
call an explanation from the GoM as to why such baseless and false report
has been prepared which is likely to create unrest in the country and
spoil the atmosphere which may prove destructive for the country?
I would request the ulama and responsible people of madrasas and other
responsible persons to form a united front and convey the truth and their
difficulties to the sensible and justice-loving Hindu brethren and other
minorities and get ready to take suitable legal action to protect the
integrity of the country.
Dr. Sayeedul Wahidi, New Delhi
CIA
& MI6 in Bombay blasts
If there is an iota of truth, in the media reporting of allegations of
involvement of CIA and British intelligence services in the Bombay bomb
blast, supposedly made in the 3 anonymous letters received by Justice Kode
which he has included in his brief for further investigations, the matter
of state security is indeed very grave.
Our security establishment that is in the habit of conveniently rounding
up the always easily available Muslims as the prime source of all
destabilization in the country, should not be blinded by the communal
hatred to ignore the real sinister sources of attacks on our country’s
unity and integrity and they should not hesitate to keep the general
public informed on a day to day basis, about all such sources of
subversion and the real motivations of such subversion, so that state
could get full support and sympathy in its efforts to ensure greater
watertight net of security against forces that are deliberately pushing
the Muslim face in front, to hide their own nefarious designs.
People are the best source of our countries’ strength. If they are kept
informed and if they are united against foreign threat of subversion, then
the task of our adversaries will be that much harder.
Western agencies are expert in playing such dirty tricks. The classic
pattern is to encourage potential adversaries to attack and then gang in
with all their might. The provocation from an adversary is the key to
their so-called legitimized aggression. Attacks on Tojo’s Japan and
Saddam’s Iraq are the most glaring examples of US machinations in the
overall scheme of their objectives. India should grasp and understand the
ramification of all such overt and covert interventions and strive to
build up the unity of the nation by earning the trust and loyalties of all
communities. RSS and its infantile off-shoots are inadvertently preparing
ground for massive interventions by the West. Even their own troops of
innumerable NRI sympathizers will be duped into providing willing
assistance to such subversion of their beloved nation. They should see the
future in its proper perspective and stop further division in the national
polity. If not checked now, its poisonous spread could take a big toll and
it will take decades before India will regain its freedom, if ever. Let
the 3 anonymous letters serve as a warning to Sangh Parivar and its
short-sighted leadership. It is unfortunate that the possible truth will
be out only after a lapse of full eight years, when hundreds of innocents
have already suffered unwarranted incarcerations for the prejudiced
handling of the security establishment. All such innocents should be
promptly freed and they should be generously compensated to win the
confidence and gratitude of Muslim community.
Ghulam Muhammed, Mumbai
ghulam_muhammed@hotmail.com
Islam and Secularism
This is with reference to some fundamental issues raised by Mr. Zeyaul
Haque in his review of the book “Islam and Secularism in the Middle East”
by John L. Esposito and Azzam Tamimi.
Secularism, in the modern world, is largely concerned with the
relationship between State and Religion, not only in a philosophical sense
but in a functional sense because the religious majority in a democratic
state tends, sometimes unconsciously but more often consciously, to colour
the state in its own colour. In this sense, the State even though
professedly secular, stands discoloured and flaws become obvious and
visible in its secularism. In my view, democracy and secularism must go
together, because no democratic state is wholly unireligious. The other
face of the coin is the treatment of religious minorities by the State.
By this definition, no Islamic state can be secular because howsoever just
and generous its attitude towards the non-Muslim minorities is, the latter
do not enjoy an equal but a protected, subordinate status. Thus, they
constitute second class citizens who are not permitted access to a
decision-making position either in the legislature or the executive or the
judiciary. Their enforced dependence affects their social behaviour and
status, even if and when they occupy high posts in the administration.
On the other hand, all religious minorities in any modern state including
Muslim minorities seek equality and, therefore, desire the State to be
secular in theory and in practice. In fact, the state’s allegiance to
secularism provides them with the rationale and the yardstick to protest
against discriminatory treatment in any form.
In the Christian world, the Christian-majority states have largely gone
beyond the desire of moulding the state according to Christian principles
or as an instrument of promoting Christianity. But neither the Muslim
world nor the Hindu world have separated religion from state, in this
sense. In both Muslim and Hindu worlds, there are active groups –
sometimes militants – who aspire to and work for the transformation of
the State into an Islamic or a Hindu Dharma state, though with a
difference. The Hindu militants wish to achieve the transformation, while
constantly paying homage to secular principles and denying theocracy. The
Islamic militants come out openly and frankly for a theocratic state. Many
Christian majority states, often, also adopt the Hindu mode in practice.
The upsurge of ethnicity-based on race and language and fortified by
geography and history is a different phenomenon though ethnicity may be
supported by religious affinity in some cases. In any case it is causing
cracks in the existing state structure, all over the world and leading to
two contrary tendencies of fission and fusion. The Chechens struggle for
liberation from Russia has so long been couched in the language of Islam
vs Orthodox Christianity that one often fails to see it as simply another
case of freedom struggle of a colonial people from imperial rule. But the
Kurds are struggling against brother Muslims, in Turkey, Iraq, Iran and
Syria, just as the Basques are struggling against Christians in France and
Spain.
However, let us keep aside the case of territorially defined
non-self-governing peoples within the recognized boundaries of
nation-states (which need not be treated as sacrosanct as they are always
subject to modification under internal or external pressure), and confine
ourselves to the existential dilemma of modern Islam posed by Mr. Zeyaul
Haque. For the present the Muslim world can offer no solution - neither
the Kemalist State nor the Shari'ah State - primarily because the Ummah is
generally viewed as a single seamless fraternity, though it is in fact
fragmented into many Muslim majority and Muslim minority states, which
aspires, in its heart of hearts, to bring them all together under a
Caliphate Restored. The Ulema have obviously not come to term with the
reality of the state system and, therefore, fail to see that the world
order based on the State system whatever its deficiencies totally
de-recognizes theocracy as a form of governance and refuses to accept any
discrimination among citizens on the basis of religion. In any case, the
Muslim communities in Muslim majority countries have made their own choice
in their own interest and not in the interest of the Millat dispersed in
the Muslim minority states, singly or as a whole. Each state has its own
compulsions and, therefore, the Muslim minorities should be equally free
to make their choice. Thus, in my view, the situation of the two sets are
not relevant to each other, though both are equally subject to the spirit
of the time.
However, the secular principle has also to come to terms with the
pressures of religious majoritarianism – Islamic, Hindu, Christian or
otherwise, which seeps through many fissures and cleavage lines in the
structure of the secular state. To draw the line between permissible form
and tolerance level of such seepages and the transformation of a secular
democracy into a theocracy is perhaps the task of harmonization and
accommodation, which awaits the world order in the coming decades.
Syed Shahabuddin, Editor, Muslim
India, New Delhi
muslim@del3.vsnl.net.in
q |
