BeyondHeadlines

Tag: Indian Muslim

  • Earlier I was Indian First but now I am only a ‘Muslim’

    Earlier I was Indian First but now I am only a ‘Muslim’

    By Almas Naseem

    A newly established thought of being a minority has been engulfing in my thoughts from past few days. Belonging to a minority group in a secular and democratic state must not make a difference in an ideal world; but it does.

    Disclaimer: We are here talking about the biggest democracy in the world. Like many other minority communities in India, I have constitutional rights of being equal like all other citizens in the country. However, these rights and status of being equal now lay in vain.

    Living in the national capital of India, from past 23 years, born and bought up in a very secular and democratic environment, the change in scenarios around the world especially in this country becomes dangerously evident. I still remember the feeling of being proud I would feel in school when my teacher would talk about India being a secular and democratic state. The fundamental right of being Equal before the law (Article 14-18) gave a feeling of living in the best world in the mind of a 7-year-old child.

    Right to equality includes equality before the law, the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, gender or place of birth, equality of opportunity.

    The feeling of “other” has been a realizing fact especially after 2014. Assemblies in school would include all prayers from different religions from Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Islam, celebrating different festivals in my locality was the norm. Every aspect of being an Indian was an endearing moment for me.

    Now, I am an Indian Muslim. My identity is my religion before my state. I have been living in denial that a bill like CAB and NRC, which tarnishes the constitution, will not be a reality. The denial which I have when friends I have grown up with, share social media posts about “Hindutva being in danger because of growing population of Muslims”, when I meet people and they ask my full name to know which religion I belong to, and the reluctance they show when I tell them “Yes, I am a Muslim”. The extreme intimidation caused by one statement of our respected Home Minister: ‘Buddhist, Sikh and Christian refugees ‘need not be afraid’, not mentioning the majority of these minority groups. The denial is over now. The reality of being “other” in this country is getting on the verge of breakdown now. Times when Politicians should talk about inclusion, development and climate change, they still propagate on Religious Minorities.

    The worst part among this is that the majority do agree and take side with such ministers and politicians. We must acknowledge how the world is bringing a wave against Islam followers. Concentration camps meant for a particular religious community is the hard-hitting reality of the world, From Uyghur Muslims in China to newly formed concentration camps in Assam.

    However, my hope of being as equal as my constitution promised will be enlightened always. The lyrics from Tarānah-e-Hind By Allama Iqbal will be my most cherished memory from school.

    Maẕhab nahīṉ sikhātā āpas meṉ bair rakhnā
    Hindī haiṉ ham, wat̤an hai Hindositāṉ hamārā

  • ‘तुम मुसलमान नहीं हो, मैं ये दावे से कहता हूँ’

    ‘तुम मुसलमान नहीं हो, मैं ये दावे से कहता हूँ’

    मुसलमान…

    ये ज़िन्दगी ख़ुदा की नेमत
    ये आवाज़ हक़-परस्ती खातिर

    फिर किस ख़ौफ़ से डरें
    क्यूँ जिकर  भी मरें

    क्यों न कहें जो हक़ीक़तें हैं तुम्हारी
    आखिर कब तक चलेगी ये ज़ुल्म-व-सितम की सवारी

    तुम हो बुझदिल, शायद ये बात तुम भी जानते हो
    इसलिए बेगुनाहों को तुम मारते हो

    मज़हब के नाम पे लोगों को बरगलाते हो
    झूठे-झूठे क्या ख़ूब सुनहरे ख्वाब तुम दिखाते हो

    नफ़रत नहीं है अपने आपमें जल रहे हो तुम
    अपने पागलपन से इंसानियत को कुचल रहे हो तुम

    किस इस्लाम ने तुमको ये सबक़ है सिखाया
    मार दो सबको बच्चा हो, बुजुर्ग हो, अपना  या पराया

    क़त्ल-व-ग़ारत बस जिहाद यही है…?
    आतंक जो फैलाये  बस मुसलमान वही  है…?

    क्या सलीक़े से कभी क़ुरआन पढ़ा है तुमने?
    जाहिलियत से अपने आगे बढ़ा है तुमने?

    तुम्हारी चाह दूसरी है…
    तुम्हारी राह दूसरी है…

    तुम मुसलमान नहीं हो,  मैं ये दावे से कहता हूँ
    क्यूंकि क़ुरआन पाक को मैं अच्छे से पढ़ता हूँ…

    जो हक़ बात को बतलाये
    राहे-रास्त पे जो चलाये
    अमन व आमान, अख़लाक़-मुहब्बत, भाई-चारगी
    बस इस्लाम यही है…

    बुराइयों से रुक जाओ
    ख़ुदा  का फ़रमान यही है…

    अपने आप पे जो क़ाबू  कर ले
    ज़िहाद वही  है…

    जो समझे इंसानों, बेज़ुबानों का दुःख-दर्द
    बस मुसलमान वही है…

    (युवा कवि साहिल तनवीर चम्पारण के बैशखवा गांव के रहने वाले हैं. इन दिनों दिल्ली में पत्रकारिता की पढ़ाई कर रहे हैं. इनसे 7838967058 पर सम्पर्क किया जा सकता है.)

  • Where are the Leaders?

    Where are the Leaders?

    By Abdul Khaliq 

    Following an article in Indian Express (‘Like never before, I the Muslim am seen as the root cause of nation’s problems’, IE, September 27), in which I expressed dismay at the unfettered hatred being spewed against a community in public, I got a personal taste of the frightening, communally surcharged situation in the country. The hundreds of responses on social media were near unanimous in condemning me for my sectarian bias. In a sweeping criticism that brands a community for every crime committed by its deviant elements, I was reminded that the appearance of black ISIS flags in Kashmir and Kerala showed that Muslims are traitors; that Muslims are guilty of forcible conversion; that the eviction of Pandits from Kashmir clearly shows there is no place for non-Muslims wherever Muslims are a majority. The lone voices who understood my angst were the usual suspects — the “pseudo-secularists”.

    Significantly, a recurring theme in the criticism is that Muslims, who are so sensitive to hate-mongering by others, are studiedly quiescent when their leaders indulge in the most inflammatory rhetoric. As one tweet succinctly put it, “Whenever the Owaisi brothers, Imam Bukhari, Azam Khan trash our homeland, our religion, our leaders, you Muslims do not speak up.” Do you notice the “us” as distinct from the “you” in the tweet? Even six decades after Partition, there is no let-up in the pathological distrust and incomprehension that separate Hindus and Muslims.

    More than ever before, Muslims need an enlightened modern leadership that can fight systemic discrimination, and also bridge the gulf between Hindus and Muslims. Unfortunately, what they have are media-advertised, self-appointed Muslim leaders — the deadly free-riders who have, through their divisive hate-mongering, further corralled Muslims in their ghettos. Much to the delight of their blood brothers — the extreme Hindu rightwing — these leaders are further fuelling the communal cauldron with their competitive bigotry. Instead of upholding heterogeneity, Asaduddin Owaisi’s contribution to the raging conversion debate is to state that every person who enters this world is Muslim. Fanning divisive fires, Azam Khan has accused the BJP of conspiring to demolish the Taj Mahal, which he claims is Waqf property. In a stunning example of depravity, Haji Yakub Qureshi has announced an award of Rs 51 crore for the killers of the cartoonists in Paris. A friend, frustrated at the shenanigans of these rabid hatemongers, suggested that at the height of the next communal riot, they should be air-dropped into the thick of battle to reap the whirlwind of their poisonous rhetoric.

    By granting these leaders high visibility, the media has portrayed such perverse bluster as representative of Muslim thinking. Sane voices of the community have been fighting Hindu and Muslim fundamentalism but they are not heard amid this din. Moreover, in today’s India, deeply entrenched prejudice is hardly touched by liberal, secular persuasion.

    The Muslim leadership is guilty of ethnocentrism in which “one’s own group is the centre of everything and all others are scaled and rated with reference to it” (W.G. Sumner). It is a way of thinking that is suicidal for minorities in a multi-religious society, as it discourages pluralism and the egalitarian ethos. Transfixed in their monomania, these leaders are unconcerned with issues of social justice relating to class, gender, globalisation and agrarian distress. The archetypal obscurantists have been accomplices in resisting individual freedom, as witnessed in Kerala, where the rightwing Muslim party, the SDPI, joined the Bajrang Dal and others in attacking “Kiss of Love” protestors for “contaminating” Indian culture. Their exclusionary, parochial view has wreaked havoc by hardening prejudice and discrimination against the community. The embattled Muslim wants desperately to reach out across the communal divide and integrate with the rest of society in a spirit of fraternity, but he is foiled by leaders who seem bent upon using him for their cynical power games.

    The venality and opportunism of Muslim leaders have exacerbated social tensions, isolated the community and deflected attention from the issues that really matter. The stark reality is that Muslims languish on the margins of society, at par with the Dalits. The Amitabh Kundu Committee, which had been mandated to evaluate the socio-economic status of Muslims post the Sachar Committee, has in its recent report concluded that poverty levels among Muslims remain higher than the national average; that Muslims are educationally the most backward; that the percentage of educated, unemployed youth is highest among Muslims; that Muslims are the worst off in access to healthcare.

    Muslims can benefit only if there is equal treatment in education, access to healthcare, the job market, before the law. Instead of provocative machismo, Muslim leaders need to focus on solutions to systemic discrimination through dialogue, empathy with others similarly placed across society, introspection and self-criticism, negotiation and understanding contrasting viewpoints, political savvy and, if need be, lawful civil protest. The present leaders, limited by sectarian prejudice, are certainly not up to the challenge. Sadly, the community seems bereft of community-transcending, transformational leaders with a circumambient vision who can take on the bigots within and outside the community. Will Javed Akhtar, at least, step forward?

    (The writer, a former civil servant, is secretary general of the Lok Janshakti Party. The article was first published at Indian Express) 

  • बदलता राजनीतिक परिदृश्य, सामाजिक न्याय और मुस्लिम समाज

    बदलता राजनीतिक परिदृश्य, सामाजिक न्याय और मुस्लिम समाज

    Meraj Ahmad for BeyondHeadlines

    लोकतान्त्रिक देश में सबसे महत्त्वपूर्ण है चुनाव के आधार पर आम लोगों की सत्ता में भागीदारी… राजनीति सदैव समाजिकता को परिभाषित करती रही है, यहाँ तक कि राजनीति ने समाज की दशा और दिशा के निर्देशन का भी काम किया है. भारतीय समाज एकांगी समाज नहीं है. लगभग हर धार्मिक समुदाय में सामाजिक स्तरीकरण है. इसलिए आवश्यक है कि सामाजिक न्याय से जुड़े मुद्दे तथा चुनाव में इसके सम्बन्ध पर चर्चा की जाये.

    26 जनवरी 1950 को हमारे देश में संविधान लागू हो गया. मौलिक अधिकार के रूप में ऐसे प्रावधान रखे गए जिससे देश के सामाजिक धरातल को समतल बनाने का काम संभव हो सके. इन अधिकारों की परिधि को समय-समय पर माननीय सर्वोच्च न्यायलय ने बढ़ाया है. 1951 में संविधान ने सामाजिक और शैक्षणिक आधार पर पिछड़े वर्ग या SC और ST के लिए विशेष प्रावधन करने का अधिकार राज्य को दिया. इसमें कोई संदेह नहीं है कि अनुच्छेद 14, 15 और 16 भारत के सामाजिक इतिहास में युगांतरकारी रहा है. अब राज्य ‘समानता के अधिकार’ को लागू करने के लिए कानून बना सकता था, और ऐसे क़ानून बने भी. इसके बाद मंडल आयोग की सिफारिशें भी लागू हुईं, जिसने समाजिक न्याय के लिए किये गए संघर्ष को और एक कदम आगे बढाया. लेकिन क्या अब ये मान लिया जाना चाहिए था कि सामाजिक न्याय के पहिये ने अपनी परिधि पूरी कर ली है? और क्या इस परिधि में सारे धार्मिक साम्प्रदायों के पिछड़े और शोषित वर्गों का समावेश हो चुका है?

    पिछली सदी में नब्बे का दशक राजनीतिक दृष्टि से काफी उथल पुथल का रहा. एक तरफ मंडल-कमंडल का जोर था तो दूसरी तरफ गिरती हुई अर्थव्यवस्था को देखते हुए विश्व बैंक के दबाव में भारतीय अर्थव्यवस्था का विदेशी पूँजी के लिए खोला जाना था. जनता पार्टी से जन्मी भाजापा सत्ता में आई और इसके दुष्परिणाम देखे गये.

    हिन्दुत्त्व की राजनीति ने न सिर्फ गुथे हुए भारतीय समाज को कमज़ोर किया बल्कि कई वर्गों को हाशिये पर भी धकेल दिया. इस प्रकार की राजनीति ने अब तक चलने वाले विमर्श- साम्प्रदायिकता बनाम धर्मनिरपेक्षता- के वाद को राजनीति के मुख्य मंच पर न सिर्फ खड़ा किया बल्कि इसकी आड़ में निरंतर हो रही ‘सेक्युलर’ राजनीतिक असफलताओं को छिपाया भी जाने लगा. धीरे-धीरे आम आदमी से जुड़े मुद्दे किनारे होते गए और पूंजीवाद को गहराई से स्थापित किया जाने लगा. जिसका असर ये हुआ कि हर धार्मिक संप्रदाय का मेहनतकश तबक़ा और पिछड़ गया. और इसकी दोहरी मार धार्मिक अल्पसंख्यकों के पिछड़े वर्गों पर पड़ी.

    सवाल यह है कि हिंदुत्तव की राजनीति पर आधारित पार्टी इतनी गहरी पैठ कैसे बना पायी, इसे अब तक क्यों नहीं रोका गया? विपक्षी पार्टियों ने इसे रोकने का कितना प्रयास किया? और इसमें सबसे ज्यादा नुक्सान समाज के किस वर्ग का हुआ? आजादी के बाद साम्प्रदायिकता की राजनीति निश्चित रूप से भगवा बिग्रेड ने शुरू किया और यह यकायक नहीं हो गया. संघ की स्थापना ने आज़ाद भारत के भविष्य को जिस तरह से देखा, और मुस्लिम लीग जिस तरह एक नया मुल्क बनाने में कामयाब हुआ, इससे यह कहा जा सकता है कि साम्प्रदायिकता को किसी एक राजनीतिक विचारधारा से जोड़कर देखना ठीक नहीं होगा. भगवा बिग्रेड का उफान अन्य सेक्युलर कही जाने वाली पार्टियों की असफलता का ही परिणाम रहा है, और यदि भगवा रंग धीमा पड़ा है तो इसका श्रेय आम जनता को ही दिया जा सकता है; यह सामाजिक-राजनीतिक घटना ये भी सिद्ध करती है कि आम भारतीय मूलतः साम्प्रदायिकता में विश्वास नहीं रखता है.

    साम्प्रदायिकता की आग को हवा देने के अन्य कारण भी हैं. भगवा बिग्रेड के एक शीर्ष नेता ने ही कहा था कि रथ यात्रा सामाजिक आन्दोलन की धार को कुंद करने के लिए भी आयोजित की गयी थी. इस प्रकार की राजनीति को सामाजिक न्याय की लड़ाई लड़ने वालों के खिलाफ ही इस्तेमाल किया गया. यह भी प्रश्न अवश्य पूछा जाना चाहिए कि सामाजिक न्याय के सिद्धांत पर आधारित राजनीतिक पार्टियों ने विकास के साथ-साथ साम्प्रदायिकता को रोकने का कितना प्रयास किया है, विशेषकर हिंदी क्षेत्रों में? क्या सामाजिक न्याय की राजनीति करने वाले दलों ने धर्मनिरपेक्षता के सवाल पर भी पर भी उतना ही पॉलिटिकल कैपिटल लगाया है? क्या यह दोनों बातें अलग हैं या इनके साथ कोई सामंजस्य स्थापित किया जा सकता है? इसका उत्तर सबसे बड़े हिंदी भाषी क्षेत्र- उत्तर प्रदेश के पिछले दस सालों की राजनीति में छिपा हुआ है.

    अब अहम सवाल है आम आदमी से जुड़े मुद्दों का, जिससे देश के हर नागरिक चाहे वो किसी भी धर्म, ज़ात, भाषा या भौगोलिक क्षेत्र का हो, को जूझना ही पड़ता है. आम आदमी से जुड़े सवालों में मुख्य हैं भ्रष्टाचार से मुक्ति और शासन प्रशासन में पारदर्शिता, सबके लिए शिक्षा और सामान अवसर, कृषि, महिलाओं का उत्थान, बेहतर इंफ्रास्ट्रक्चर इत्यादि. पिछले दशक में एक के बाद एक भ्रष्टाचार के खुलासों के कारण बनी परिस्थितियों ने फिर से वही साम्प्रदायिकता और धर्मनिरपेक्षता का पुराना अलाप छेड़ने को मजबूर किया. पिछले दो सालों में सड़-गल गयी भ्रष्ट, साम्प्रदायिक और भाई-भतीजावाद पर आधारित राजनीति के खिलाफ हुए जन संघर्ष को जनता ने बहुत ही करीब से देखा.

    निश्चित तौर से ये कहा जा सकता है कि दिल्ली में हुए आम चुनाव के परिणाम ने राजनीति की भाषा को बदल दिया. वो कहते है न कि रूल्स ऑफ़ द गेम को ही चेंज कर दिया. राजनीतिक पार्टियों को अब लगने लगा है कि आम आदमी से जुड़े मुद्दों के आधार पर भी मज़बूत जनमत संग्रह किया जा सकता है, इसलिए अब परम्परागत राजनीति को बदलना होगा. इसको इस नज़रिए से भी देखा जा सकता है कि इस प्रकार की राजनीति ने साम्प्रदायिकता पर भी लगाम लगाने का काम किया है.

    अब इस पूरे सामाजिक और राजनीतिक परिदृश्य में मुस्लिम समाज कहां खड़ा होता है? दंगे सिर्फ नब्बे के दशक के बाद ही सच्चाई नहीं हैं. आज़ादी के तुरंत बाद से लेकर 1990 तक देश में कई भयानक दंगे हुए जिनमें हैदराबाद जनसंहार (1948), गुजरात (1969), मुरादाबाद (1980), नेल्ली (1983), सिख जनसंहार (1984), हाशिमपुरा (1987) और भागलपुर (1989) उल्लेखनीय हैं. नब्बे के बाद कई और बड़े दंगे हुए जिसमे गुजरात का नरसंहार (2002) सबसे अधिक चर्चा में रहा. निरंतर होते रहे दंगे ने धार्मिक अल्पसंख्यक समाज की कमर को तोड़ कर रख दिया है. बदलती अर्थव्यवस्था के कारण लघु-उद्योगों का भी काफी नुक्सान हुआ. दंगे की मार, बदलती अर्थव्यवस्था, और अशिक्षा के कारण मुस्लिम समाज का पिछड़ा वर्ग पूरी तरह से हाशिये पर आ गया. सच्चर समिति के अनुसार आंकड़े साबित करते हैं कि मुस्लिम समाज में शिक्षा की दर रास्ट्रीय औसत से काफी कम है. सरकारी  सेवाओं में प्रतिनिधित्तव न के बराबर है. लेकिन इन स्थितियों को बदलने के लिए क्या राजनीतिक प्रयास किये गए? इन प्रयासों की प्रकृति क्या रही है, और वास्तव में कितना अंतर हुआ है?

    प्रतिक्रिया स्वरूप राजनीतिक जवाबदेही तय करके, धार्मिक अल्पसंख्यकों का सामाजिक उत्थान कैसे किया जाये, इस पर अधिकाधिक बहस होती रही है. प्रतीकों की परम्परागत राजनीति में विशेष भाषा, परिधान और संस्कृति का दिखावी पोषण राजनीति शोषण का आधार बना. इसी के साथ ‘सेक्युलर’ बनने की होड़ में ‘माइनॉरिटी पॉलिटिक्स’ का स्वरुप तैयार किया गया. लेकिन तथ्यात्मक सामाजिक सत्य साबित करते हैं कि अब तक की जा रही राजनीति में कहीं न कहीं बड़ी भारी चूक हुई है.

    ऐसी स्थिति में प्रश्न यही कि इस बदलते परिदृश्य में मुस्लिम समाज का वोट किस आधार पर बटोरा जाए ताकि सेक्युलर राजनीति के साथ साथ सामूहिक विकास संभव हो सके? शैक्षणिक, सामाजिक और आर्थिक उत्थान के लिए प्रयास, सीधे तौर से धार्मिक अल्पसंख्यकों के लिए की जा रही राजनीति का मुख्य हिस्सा नहीं बना. आरक्षण का फ़ायदा, जिसे देश के आज़ाद होने के बाद तीनों स्तरों पर मिलना चाहिए था, नहीं मिला. मुस्लिम ओबीसी को मंडल आयोग की सिफारिशें लागू होने बाद शिक्षण संस्थानों और सरकारी नौकरियों में आरक्षण मिलना तो संभव तो हुआ लेकिन प्रतिनिध्तिव कुछ विशेष नहीं रहा (सच्चर समिति के अनुसार) जिसका मुख्य कारण है आरक्षण के अधिकार को प्राप्त करने की योग्यता ही न होना.

    अब इस तथ्य का स्पष्ट रूप से कई सरकारी दस्तावेजों में उल्लेख हो चुका है कि भारतीय मुस्लिम समाज एक एकांगी समाज नहीं है. सच्चर समिति की रिपोर्ट में उल्लेख है कि मुस्लिम समाज तीन स्तरों में विभाजित है: अशराफ (सामान्य), अज्लाफ़ (ओबीसी के बराबर) और अर्जाल (अनुसूचित जाति के बराबर). संभवतः पहली बार किसी सरकारी रिपोर्ट में अब तक एकांगी समझे जाने वाले समाज के विषय में इस प्रकार का उल्लेख किया गया.

    साफ़ है कि इस आधार पर ही राजनीतिक दिशा में क़दम बढ़ाया जाना चाहिए. साथ ही साथ Presidential Order, 1950 में दलित मुस्लिम और दलित क्रिश्चियन को अब तक जगह नहीं मिली है, और इससे सम्बंधित याचिका अभी कोर्ट में लंबित है. इसके लिए निरंतर राजनीतिक प्रयास भी किये जा रहे हैं लेकिन मुख्य राजनीति में आज भी यह बात खुलकर सामने नहीं रखी गयी है.

    उपरोक्त तथ्य इंगित करते हैं कि धार्मिक अल्पसंख्यकों के नाम पर की जा रही है “माइनॉरिटी पॉलिटिक्स” प्रभावकारी सिद्ध नहीं हुई है. अब तक जिस प्रकार राजनीतिक परिस्थितियाँ देश में उत्पन्न की गयीं उसमे साम्प्रदायिकता और धर्मनिरपेक्षता का बोलबाला रहा है. जिसका अर्थ ये भी है कि वोट डरा कर लिए गए. माइनॉरिटी पॉलिटिक्स मुख्यतः चूँकि प्रतीकात्मक मुद्दों के इर्द-गिर्द- यानि उर्दू, अलीगढ़, मदरसा इत्यादि के ही आस-पास घूमती रही, जिसके कारण धर्मनिरपेक्ष मुद्दों जैसे शिक्षा, समाजिक न्याय और रोज़गार जैसे मुद्दे कभी मुख्य रूप से आगे नहीं आ पाए. यहाँ यह समझना होगा कि सांस्कृतिक और धार्मिक मुद्दे भी आवश्यक हैं लेकिन वर्तमान स्थिति को देखते हुए प्राथमिकतायें अब तय करनी होंगी.

    चूँकि अब राजनीतिक नियम बदल रहे हैं, इसलिए नयी राजनीतिकता से अपेक्षित है कि वह इन तथ्यों की गहराई में जाए और समझे कि आम मुस्लिम समाज को राज्य के नीतिगत मामलो में धर्म के आधार पर न पहचान कर साम्प्रदायिकता के खतरे न उठाये जाएँ. उचित यही होगा कि एक सामान्य भारतीय नागरिक की तरह ही सामाजिक-शैक्षणिक स्थिति के आधार पर उसके आस्तित्व को स्वीकार कर सामूहिक विकास और पारदर्शी सरकार की परिकल्पना की जाये.

    (लेखक जे.एन.यू. में शोध छात्र हैं. इनसे  merajahmad1984@gmail.com पर संपर्क किया जा सकता है.)

  • The Arithmetic of Infinite Appeasement

    The Arithmetic of Infinite Appeasement

    Abdul Khaliq

    The ordinary Muslim dreads the period just prior to the announcement of elections because that is when his community is pulled out from the margins and brought centre stage to become the plaything for the cynical opportunism, power games and vote calculations of the two competing camps- the right wing Hindutva nationalists on the one hand and the so-called secular formations on the other. That is also when the genie of sops and screams of appeasement rend the air. Creating a permanent rift between communities and isolating the Muslim has been the barely disguised policy of the BJP camp. What is disturbing is that the central government which allegedly represents the secular forces is also tacitly abetting polarisation of communities in the hope of garnering minority support.

    Indian MuslimsLast week the government announced that it proposes to provide legal assistance to those who have been jailed on grounds of prima facie ‘doubtful’ charges in terror cases.  Predictably, the BJP has termed this as appeasement of Muslims, even those who are terrorists.  The government decision not only begs the real issues but is also a dishonest, cynical ploy to fracture relations between the two communities and reap unholy dividends.  Instead of taking measures to ensure that the investigating agencies do not wrongfully implicate innocent citizens, the government has shown its phony concern for Muslims with this meaningless but dangerous gesture; meaningless because the law in any case provides that every accused should be given legal aid and dangerous because it has provided fodder to the BJP to drive a wedge between communities.

    Not to be outdone in the murky game of vote bank politics that gives the veneer of substantial help to a particular group but actually dispenses no special privilege, the UP government last week announced earmarking of 20% of welfare scheme funds for Muslims. The fact that the welfare schemes such as NREGA, National Rural Health Mission, Indira Awaas Yogana etc are nowhere linked to caste or community but are based essentially on economic criteria makes the proposal an exercise in sheer duplicity.It may be recalled the Samajwadi Party,earlier on,in it’s manifesto had promised a reservation of 18% in government jobs for Muslims.We are yet to see or hear any progress in the matter.One only hopes that Muslims see through the arrant absurdities and wicked motives that inform these proposals

     There are other examples of the Central government using Muslims in the guise of helping them.   Its opportunistic decision to provide 4.5% specific quota for Minorities within the overall 27% quota for OBCs in government jobs and IITs coincided with the UP elections last year.  The notification remained frozen as an unimplemented pious intention as it was struck down the by the Supreme Court.  Clearly a charade, it was known all along that without legislative endorsement the executive order was bad in law.  In any case, with certain categories of Muslims already treated as OBCs, this decision would have made little difference to the job prospects of Muslims.  But the unhappy upshot is that it has poisoned relations between Muslims and other OBCs.

    The ruling party’s hypocrisy and tokenism is apparent from the fact that it sought to fiddle with aspects of reservation that have already factored in Muslims, but has been dragging its feet on the unacceptable discrimination against Dalit Christians and Muslims.  This is an issue in which the lofty principle enunciated in Article 15 of the Constitution prohibiting any discrimination on grounds of religion has been blatantly abused by the law makers themselves.  The denial of Scheduled Caste (SC) status to SC Christians and Muslims constitutes the worst form of discrimination.  The only argument against giving this status to them is that SCs who convert to these religions no longer face any social stigma.  Nothing can be more untrue.  The great Mahatma who knew this country and its people better than anyone else had this to say on the subject: ‘Whether the Harijan is nominally a Christian, Hindu, and Muslim or Sikh, he is still a harijan.  He can’t change his spots from Hinduism.  He may change his garb and call himself a Catholic harijan or a Muslim harijan or a Neo-Sikh, his untouchability will haunt him in his lifetime’.  Can the Constitution of this great land be tainted by endorsing this blatant discrimination?  The Constitutional amendments, as interpreted by our lawmakers, bear an uncanny resemblance to the philosophy of our home-grown right-wing Hindutva fundamentalists. A key concept propagated by one of the leading ideologues of the fundamentalists explicitly distinguishes between followers of indigenous religions from those that originated elsewhere. Muslims and Christians are foreigners in India which rightly belongs to the adherents of religions born here. Tragically, a similar mindset is evident in the denial of SC status to SC Muslims and Christians while granting this concession to SC Buddhists and Sikhs.

    The Congress has time and again been guilty of playing footsie with ‘soft’ Hindutva.  It will be recalled that in the 1980s , the Rajiv Gandhi government, having catered to Muslim ‘appeasement’ in the  Shah Bano case, sought to rectify the balance by throwing open the doors of the Babri Masjid to the Hindus for worship of Lord Ram, whose idol was installed inside the mosque in 1949.  That was the starting point of a chain of events that ultimately destroyed the Babri Masjid.  In the same amoral cynical manner, the present government surreptitiously hanged Afzal Guru earlier this year with the clear intent of taking the wind out of the sails of the BJP’s persistent refrain of minority appeasement in not executing him.  That he was hanged before the Supreme Court delivered its judgement on executing prisoners, including Guru, who had served inordinately long prison sentences; that he was not one of the attackers of Parliament; that he did not kill anybody; that he was held guilty of being an accomplice not on the basis of direct proof but on ‘circumstantial evidence’, are critical issues of justice that were considered subordinate to satisfying ‘the collective conscience of the nation’.  However, the mass conscience is not similarly outraged by the fact that Rajiv Gandhi’s Hindu assassins continue to escape the gallows.  Owaisi is sent to jail for his hate-filled speech but the archetypal apostle of hate, Praveen Togadia roams free to spew venom against the Muslim community.  More hurtful than anything else, the fight against terrorism is deeply tainted with religious overtones.  Scores of innocent Muslims have been arrested and tortured only because of their religious affiliations.  Such colossal injustice has become routine in the life of the nation and is seen as normal ‘collateral damage’ in the fight against terrorism. Can you blame Muslims if they harbour the thought that all men are equal but some are more equal?  They are distraught at the selective application of the law.

    For decades the BJP’s theme song is that Muslims are a pampered favoured community who have embraced group privilege at the expense of the majority.  The absolute hollowness of this vicious myth is poignantly reflected in the socio-economic plight of the community.  Muslims languish on the margins of society at the bottom of the ladder, almost at par with the Dalits.  A recent government survey conducted by the NSSO has noted that among various religious groups, Muslims have the lowest living standard with an average per capita expenditure of a mere Rs. 32.66 per day as compared to Rs.37.5 for Hindus, Rs. 51.43 for Christians and Rs. 53.30 for Sikhs.  Accused of being government’s ‘damads’ (sons-in-law), Muslims constitute less than 6% of the staff strength in the Central Government.  In fact a recent NSSO study reveals that the recruitment of minorities in government jobs including PSUs, paramilitary   forces and public sector banks has actually dropped from 7.25% in 2009-10 to 6.24% in 2011-12.  The most recent report of the National Monitoring Committee for Minorities Education (NMCME 2013) shows that Muslims have the lowest literacy rate among communities at 59% against the national average of 65%.  In urban areas, the illiterate percentage of Muslims is 42.9% for males and 50.5% for females against the national average of 27.7% and 36.5% respectively.  There is damning evidence to show that the State has failed to foster an effective, unbiased and inclusive system that could facilitate an adequate presence of Muslims in educational, professional and vocational institutions.  On account of communalisation of the public space, Muslims are not able to access all the opportunities available, leading to their continuing isolation and ghettoisation.

    Muslims want to bridge the distance between communities, not exacerbate it.  They are heartily sick of the politics that uses secularism as a cloak of convenience.  Like their fellow countrymen they know that for a united, equal and just society, they need to cross the religious divide and care for one another as brothers.  As a troubled, besieged community, they are painfully aware that the communalism of one group feeds on the communalism of the other.  Rather than being given nominal group privileges, they want a level playing field in education, in the job market, when looking for accommodation or when an act of terrorism takes place.  To modify what Martin Luther King said in the American context, the Muslims hope that they will not be unfairly judged by their religious identity but truly judged by the content of their character.

    (The author, a former civil servant, is Secretary General of Lok Janshakti Party.The views  are personal.akhaliq2007@gmail.com)

  • A Letter from Muslim Youth- No Fiction but Facts

    A Letter from Muslim Youth- No Fiction but Facts

    Dear Indians! 

    You should not be wondering who I am because my name is Rehan Ansari similar to Ahmed or Saeed or Mirza and I am not fictionalizing it. My English may not be as good or I may not appear as intelligent as many of my fellow Indians coming from convents. Still I have a heart which cries and eyes that flows/weep.

    During election all parties remember me, some only to provoke my opposition whereas most others as my benefactor. But in the last sixty year I have been pushed to the brink in all spheres of life- courtesy our secular democratic rulers. Then I’m informed through high powered committees that I am the most backward, illiterate, poor and what not – even worse than those who have been deprived of respectable life for ages.

    How could I reach such a pass in just sixty years is a riddle with which our sociologist/intellectuals/historians will debate for a long but for me it is not difficult to imagine as I am made to live my fate.

    Letter from Muslim Youth- No Fiction but FactsMy history begins with our independence when my beloved country was bifurcated (later trifurcated) on communal lines. A great concerted effort was made to make all believe that I shall be made responsible for the path chosen by the stalwarts of freedom struggle. Consequently started large scale communal riots in the early decades causing innumerable economic damage to me. My life, property and prospect became booty to the rioters, most oftenly guided by those who were supposed to protect me. In the ensued frenzy more rioters were mobilised, yatras organised with sole aim of demoralising me to lose my self esteem, self confidence and self reflect. Then the Secular Parties Cap-walllas establish to handover me my report card. But never care to empower us by political representation.

    On the other hand “Non-Cap Wallas”-once-communal parties, whose existence depends on our opposition, halt every step, however small it is, in the name of Muslim Appeasement. They Organize Yatras, to demolish Mosque, supervise our genocide, Jailed and Encountered our Youth in a COLD BLOOD or would I say in a well planned way. They deny our right to get justice that led the Supreme Court to order a hearing in the other states.  First they plan to encounter us and then plan how to sabotage the case. They claim of development, but what’s the use of it without the security of life, free will and equal opportunity if not a helping hand.

    I know the fact these lip services and hypocrisies of Political parties are not limited to the Muslims but our fellow Indians are suffering the same problems.

    Despite all these, there are Muslim Achievers in almost every field because of their hard work, entrepreneurship and support from the inherent legacy of helping others in our community.  Opportunities created by the free economy and most of all the unending support of my fellow Indians, their sense of Justice as human being helped us grow.

    I know that most of the Muslim political leader doesn’t have a public base but dropped in our community from the high command.   They sing their party’s song and expect us to dance on it.  Our Social and religious leadership lacks knowledge and vision. Scarcity of resources and lack of faith among themselves added to our misery.

    I am not frustrated but deeply saddened and scared with the daily state of affairs in our country. I am scared of the biased nature of our intelligence and security agencies. They work in tandem to encounter us as can be seen from the leaked CBI chargsheet in Ishrat Jahan case. Despite the expose, of the involvement of right wing forces belong to Non Cap Wallas’ Parviar, in terror cases, I am afraid of getting arrested after every terrorist attack. I am scared to use Mobile, facebook, twitter or other social networking tools because I might get arrested when I speak against some Thackrey. Freedom of Expression is only permitted when someone abuses our beloved Prophet, Sacred book or great religion.

    May be I am being too harsh but the Truth is mostly bitter. I have a wonderful religion and I know many interpretations. I know our religious leaderships come from Madarsas of different sects who are ill- educated to satisfy the educated young mind. They need to learn that the differences among sects are the flexibility allowed in Islam. There is lots of scope for Ijtehad- Interpretations according to the prevailing condition that makes this religion Universal.

    We like to be left alone to settle these disputes of interpretation. There can be different explanation of constitution like many courts in our country construe our constitution or applying of law differently. There is always a chance for improvement.

    I know Islam and Muslims are used by our political parties to come into existence-read Non Cap Wallas or once- communal parties. I also know that Islam is used globally by some dominant and powerful countries for their energy security. But History will prove their deception.

    I know I am hanged to satisfy the collective conscience whereas a terror accused belonging to the Parivars- are paid by our government. My Haj subsidies to be phased out but Bonus are distributed on Diwali. Many other religious Melas, fares, Yatras get government support. My mosques first demolished and then decided to be divided but no punishment for the conspirators. I am also affected by the Corruption, Poverty, hunger, Female Foeticides. But my voice against all these evils did not create sensation hence not covered by our national media.

    Yes I require all types of affirmative action to uplift my community. I need Reservations in Education and Employment because I am left behind or in other words to become competent. I need Scholarship because don’t have money to get my livelihood. Need to be kept in Priority Lending Sector by the banks to venture in to small scale business so that I can add up something in the national GDP.

     Affirmative actions are not appeasement but Justice for the weaker section of the society. Justice is more important to bring equality and prosperity for all in the society. Above all I need respect, love and security for my life and my family.

    My hope lies in my belief in Allah, creator of not only me but the whole universe including, Cap- Wallas , Non- Cap-Wallas and their Parivar. I also believe that the intrinsically just and secular credentials not of any politician but my fellow countrymen will prevail. They will provide security to my life, will fight with me for justice, and will help us grow with them if not polarized by the politicians on communal line.

    A fellow Indian wants me to save from the clutches of religious (Islamic) fundamentalism but advocates for Positive Hindutva. He might get some vastanvis, sareshwalas, and siddiquis around Modi but for general Muslims, BJP and Modi is like a saying in Hindi, Karela upar se Neem Chadha, it means “Neem coated Bitter Melon” How can one have it?

     May Allah bring Peace, Harmony and Prosperity to our country. Amen! 

  • My Name is Khan and…

    Pain of a celebrity being an Indian Muslim

    Ram Puniyani

    Shah Rukh Khan is no ordinary celebrity. Being the lead actor with a very vibrant presence on big and small screen makes him to be very much on the top. Recently the communal elements asked him to produce his patriotism certificate. Khan in one of his articles in The New York Times-Outlook Turning Points ((January 2013) suggested that India has a bias against Muslims and goes on to say that “Political leaders have made me a symbol of all that they think is wrong and unpatriotic about Muslims in India.” He also writes “There have been occasions when I have been accused of bearing allegiance to our neighboring country-this even though I am an Indian, whose father fought for freedom of India. Rallies have been held where leaders have exhorted me to leave and return (to Pakistan) when they refer to my original home land.”

    In response to this the Pakistan foreign minister Rahman Malik was quick to ask the Indian Government to provide security to Khan. Hafiz Sayeed went to the extent of inviting Khan to Pakistan with a promise to provide him with security. Both these are sort of pinpricks which are usually dished out by the neighbors to each other. When Hindu minorities suffer in Pakistan the immediate chorus comes up here in India is to ask to take steps for security of Hindus in Pakistan. Malik and Sayeed were just trying to put some salt in to the wounds of Indian psyche, not that they are concerned about Indian Muslims as such. They belong to a country where large section of Muslims themselves is struggling to live the life of dignity. A section of Muslims is being called Mohajirs and is denied most of the privileges of citizens. In Pakistan currently the Shia Muslims and Ahmadiyas are an object of wrath. So lesser said about Rahman Malik and Hafiz Sayeed Company the better.

    My Name is Khan and…

    The criticism directed against Khan was that he is giving ammunition to the elements across the border to criticize India. But can we keep the wounds of Indian Muslims under wraps, with no smell polluting the air? As far as Khan’s statement that there are biases against Indian Muslims is concerned, it is a painful reality. Muslims have been demonized; the strong streak of Islamophobia persists all over. The myths, stereotypes and biases against Indian Muslims were heightened with the partition tragedy, when the communal forces propagated that it is due to Muslims that India had to be partitioned. This is a total misreading of recent history as majority of Indian Muslims neither supported the idea of Partition nor were behind the Muslims League. Muslim League cut a sorry figure in 1937 assembly elections as majority of Indian Muslims did not vote for Jinnah party. And after the Jinnah’s resolution demanding Paksitan in 1940, majority of Indian Muslims took out processions opposing the demand of Pakistan.

    The other biases against Muslim community started intensifying through the propaganda by the communal forces, the biases about the Muslims related to the atrocities committed by Muslim kings, the biases related to polygamy, number of children, beef eating and their loyalty to Pakistan. The parallel process of communal violence started marginalizing them from social scene, the violence against them (Muslims are 13.4% as per 2001 census; Muslims are close to 90% amongst the riot victims). These stereotypes against Muslims are currently at peak and hatred resulting from these biases is leading to repeated communal violence and polarization.

    While the average Muslim has been living with these biases pasted on his/her forehead, after 9/11, ‘All terrorists are Muslims’ has also been popularized through various mechanisms, section of media, words of mouth, SMS chains through mobile phones and the social media. While in the regular channels Muslims are too few, in the offbeat channels of social life, they do excel as in sports, music and films. At the same time the Muslims, who by mistake reach the top slots in position of authority have to be more careful for obvious reasons. Here the communal parties and outfits pick up some pro-Pakistan label against Muslim celebrities. Dilip Kumar, Yusuf Khan, was initially given the same abuse of being for Pakistan and he had to face lot of music when he was awarded the highest civilian honor by the government of Pakistan, Nishan-e-Pakistan. Lot of demonstrations was held in front of his house by these outfits to humiliate him. That may be one of the reasons for him not being awarded the highest civilian honor, which he deserves many times over. Mohammad Azaruddin, the outstanding cricketing talent and ex-Indian cricket Captain was mocked that he plays poorly when playing against Pakistan, to enable Pakistan to win!.

    Shah Rukh Khan is another such celebrity. He had to face the double flak. Being a Khan, twice he was detained and stripped at the US entry points. Interestingly when he was detained many of his fans were approaching him for his autographs right there. In India the Shiv Sena, claiming to be a patriotic organization, holding on to Hindu Nationalism not Indian nationalism, has meted similar treatment to Shah Rukh Khan. Khan is from Peshawar and it is an enlightening point to know that his father was the follower of Khan Abdul Gaffer Khan, Frontier Gandhi, and participated in freedom struggle.

    Shah Rukh Khan knows he is too secure; he is not talking as a victim, it is not from the angle of victimhood. He is expressing the anguish of being a Muslim at a time when in India the anti Muslim sentiments are at a peak and these get a boost from global Islamophobia created by American propaganda. Imagine the pain of an Indian when he is looked down to be owing allegiance to the neighboring country? Only those seeped in the values of Indian freedom struggle and those respecting the values of Indian Constitution can feel the anguish of Shah Rukh Khan and many more Muslims, celebrity or not, who have to keep producing loyalty and patriotism certicates time and over again, and that too to those belonging to the politics based on the ideology, which was not a part of freedom movement and has little respect for values of Indian Constitution.

    In popular psyche the identification of Indian Muslims with Pakistan has been cultivated with vehemence by communal forces. Muslims are more loyal to Pakistan is a standard propaganda. How can we judge patriotism of an individual? By cheering for the cricket teams or by allegiance to Indian Constitution? The matter of fact is that some disgruntled Muslims may be showing their anguish by cheering for Pakistan, in cricket matches, but that’s where the matters rest. A lot has been made of this deliberately and this falsehood has become part of social common sense. Shah Rukh Khan has been made a deliberate target by the communal forces and it is a part of their game of manufacturing biases against Muslim community as a whole. His expression in the said article is expression of what many Muslims suffer in India, celebrities included.

  • Dichotomy between Qur’anic Equality and Indian Muslim Caste System

    Simeen Kaleem and Kartikey Shukla for BeyondHeadlines

    “O mankind! We (God) created you from a single pair of male and a female; and made you into peoples and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise each other). Verily the most honoured in the sight of God is (he who is) the most righteous among you… (The Holy Quran, Surah al-Hujuraat, verse 13)

    The Holy book Qur’an insists on the radical equality of all Muslims, with no differentiation in inferiority and superiority, But caste and associated notions of caste-based superiority and inferiority still do play an important role in Indian Muslim society. And still the zat, jati, biraderi and quam remain a significant feature of Indian Muslim society, with slight regional variations. India (including some south Asian countries) being the sole nation in the world practicing and representing caste system amongst Muslims stand alone to justify and trace back its origin to the hierarchical structures in Hindu community.

    In most parts of India, like Kashmir, Muslim society is based on the existence of occupationally specific caste groups, which have their own caste system. This dichotomy between Qur’anic equality and Indian Muslim caste system social practice has been looked and dealt with in many different ways. Some think the origin traces back its influence to the Bhraminical society and hence regarded as a cultural baneful impact while others believe that caste system in Muslims is a result of occupational divide.

    It was not the result of mass conversion that led to the islamization in India but the incursion of Mahmud of Ghazni and Muhammad of Ghor that led to the serious settlement of Muslims in India. The havoc caused by Genghis khan and his grandson led to the countless number of people seeking for refuge and safety in India. And further the mughal rule led to the inflation of Muslims in India. It was not the process of individual conversion but the process of conversion of entire groups or sections which went into the process of Islamization. And in this process Islam rooted itself in Indian local, cultural and ritual practices displacing elements of other religion. Although the conversion of one or many section to Islam happened but the endogamous circle prior to conversion was still preserved. So even after the conversion to Islam, marriages continued to happen within the original caste group. And this led to the inflow of Hindu element (practices) into the Islamic culture. Thus it was not the influence of Hinduism but, rather, the continued impact of Hindu beliefs and customs on the converts who still held their Hindu cultural beliefs and practices. That explains the continued hold of caste-related practices and assumptions among large sections of the Indian Muslim community.

    Muslims in India are broadly divided into Ashrafs and Ajilafs on the basis on ethnic origin and descent. The superiors or the ‘ashrafs’ were the descendents of the foreign i.e Arab, central Asia, Iran, Afghanistan and upper caste Hindus. And the ‘ajlafs’ which include the lower group of people like weavers, barbers, tailors who were looked down by the superior ‘ashrafs’.

    In order to provide suitable authenticity to their claim of social superiority, medieval Indian ashraf scholars wrote numerous texts that sought to interpret the Qur’an to suit their purposes, thus effectively denying the message of Quran of radical social equality. The notion of Persian kings and their divine rights seem to have influenced many scholars to mention the superiority of the nobility against the principle of Qur’anic egalitarianism.

    During 14th century, a Turkish scholar, Ziauddin Barani who was the member of the court of Muhamad Bin Tughlaq of Delhi sultanate, played the major role in stratification amongst Muslim communities. He wrote Fatawa-i Jahandari, in which Barani gave his intense casteist view, and regarded the Ashraf Muslims as racially superior to the Ajlaf Muslims. He mentioned that all high positions and privileges are the rights of the superior born and not the Indian Muslims.

    Even in his interpretation of the Qu’ranic verse “Indeed, the pious amongst you are most honored by Allah”, he measured piousness with noble birth and Barrani was specific in writing that the “sons of Mohamed” i.e. Ashrafs “be given a higher social status than the low-born i.e. Ajlaf.

    The working of this stratification was supposed to suppress the Ajlaf or the working class. Emphasizing his arguments by taking its basis from the Holy Quran, so that the possibility of cross questioning amongst the new Muslim converts is completely suppressed. And the possibility of the ashraf rulers to rule the country efficiently is increased. Although it should be clearly understood that, it was not only Barani with his idea of the ashraf supremacy but it was a common ideology shared by ulmas and sufis of that time, which came as one voice in his Fatawa-i Jahandari.

    How ignorant are we to accept whatever society gives and teaches us!!! How incapable we are to establish equality amongst the people of our own community, who deserve it as their religious right!! When will we follow the real teachings of Islam and not the teachings of the ones who have interpreted it in their own way, for their own benefit!!!

    Social Stratification among Muslim Communities in India

  • Social Stratification among Muslim Communities in India

    Social Stratification among Muslim Communities in India

    Simeen Kaleem and Kartikey Shukla for BeyondHeadlines

    How does the importance of ethnic identity vary within the same community or religion? Islamic ideology fundamentally opposes the notion of caste. Caste refers to “hierarchical endogamous group which based on the division of labour”, while Islam stand for equality in social and religious sphere. The concept of equal society is an egalitarian phenomenon, in reality there is no society based on perfect equality. Every society has a system of rating and ranking among its members based on certain criteria. It may be defined in the form of social, political or economic status. In India, caste system is used to rank individual or groups, as high and low and thus, form the hierarchy among the community. Throughout the history of human civilisation we have practiced some form of social or group classification such as lords and serfs, landlords and landless labourer, high caste and low caste. Social stratification is a system of structured inequality which is based on select criteria and limits the access to services and freedom that are practice by majorities. Hindu Varna system is one of the worst and exploitative social practices of the existing social history of the time. Dr. B.R Ambedkar, known as the father of Indian constitution, opposed this caste system, he argued that the notion of caste exist in every section of Indian society.

    Caste is an integral part of Hinduism, but in Islam, there is no evidence found that indicates the presence or characteristics of caste. The history of Islam in India is well over thousand years old today. It has blended beautifully into the background of its adopted land and contributed immensely to the formation of a composite Indian culture and the building of the India as a nation. But today Islam and its practitioners are not a homogeneous entity as widely believed. In fact there is a big deal of diversity in the manner in which Islam is practiced throughout India. Ek hi saf mein khade ho gaye Mahmood-o-Ayaz, Na koi banda raha aur na koi banda-nawaz which literally means “Sultan and slave in single file stood side by side. Then no servant was nor master, nothing did them divide”. The above shayari is devoted Islamic rituals practices, the above line is written for Mahmood of Gazni.

    Social stratification denotes various kinds of social inequalities in the specific form or nature. Caste system which is derived from the Brahminical practices among Hindus remains the main cause of social hierarchy in Indian community. The notion of Muslims in India has been accepted as homogeneous groups which is not sociologically correct. There are differences which are in the form of regional differences and cultural and social practices. Since the independence, government and political parties are using community as an identical issue rather than any effort to make them inclusive to compete with new economic paradigm. Intellectual’s forces always compare this community with Hindus in the process to reply Hindu extremist forces which never opposed Muslims development and created its bad image among Hindus.

    Social backwardness of Muslims is not only limited to its socio-economic indicators but is deep rooted in social economic relation which decides social power structure among them. In India, there are social differences in every religion because of the historical cultural administration that exist in Indian social environment. Hierarchy is one of the major subject to study in sociological studies, we cannot justify it whether it’s or bad or not for any society without knowing its form of practices. EarlierJajmani System was mode of economic exchange in Hindu society but later it had changed in to exploitative in the nature of social interaction. The Brahmins enjoyed because of their superiority in the occupation and Dalits became vulnerable.

    So, was it the influence of the Hindu society that led to social stratification amongst Muslims in India? What is the extent to which caste system is prevalent among Muslim community?  And is it the only aspect of inequality or there are many more? What are the factors responsible for creating inequalities among Muslims? And what impact all this has created amongst Muslim society, in India?

    (to be continue…) 

  • In Search of Muslim Women Leadership

    In Search of Muslim Women Leadership

    Shazia Shaikh for BeyondHeadlines

    As we are celebrating International women’s day today, there are many challenges ahead and many constraints to be removed. Nevertheless, women are achieving in diverse fields and showing their magnificence in non-conventional fields. In fact, different nation-states including India have appointed women as their heads of state.  Having said this, representation of women has become very critical issue especially in a traditional society like India where caste, class and religion etc dominates Indian politics and for this reason, demand for affirmative action has been made since 1997 and which is still pending in Lok Sabha for the final approval.  Hence, in this context, the question of representation from the largest minority of India i.e. Muslim women needs to be highlighted.  Therefore, in this article, an attempt is made to highlight historical facts to understand the issues of leadership of Muslim women and to discuss the major challenges.

    In the first war of independence, Begum Hazrat Mahal from Awadh presidency had given appalling defeat to the Englishmen who had rushed to call their native soldiers back from Britain to retaliate with her force.  It was Begum Hazrat Mahal who took in charge of Awadh in the very critical stage and even when her husband Wajid Ali Shah retreated from commanding his presidency. In fact, historians have been categorical about her bravery and leadership that how this veiled woman had transcended from Zanan Khana (a niche in palace confined exclusively for women) to the battle ground. Hence, Begum Hazrat Mahal is a leading model and heroic example. Before this in the 13th century Razia Sultana had received the honor of being most courageous and brave woman. Highly influenced by her extra ordinary attributes, father King Altamash had delegated the reign of Delhi to her instead of her brothers and hence by rejecting the patriarchal order.  Similarly, Chand Bibi from Northern India, and Shahjahan Begum from Bhopal, in the 16th and 20th century respectively are renowned historical figures known for their bravery and success.

    Then why do we always forget the significant contribution of Muslim women who lived valiant life as the leader in the medieval and modern history? Therefore, is this fact not enough for those who defy leadership of Muslim women by often terming them as delicate creations? Could it be not a motivating factor for the present generation of Muslim women to fight against menaces, and emerge as victorious? Hence, in fact their dynamic possession would always encourage Muslim women in every age to conquer the intricate challenges and to accomplish their motto. 

    Though Quran is not against women’s leadership, the Ulama have conjured up this on the basis of this tradition. Abu Bakr said: Allah caused me considerable benefit from one sentence. When Prophet (PBUH) heard that the Iranians had made the daughter of Chosroe their ruler, he said: ‘that nation can never prosper which has assigned its reign to a woman.’

    However, this Hadith is not authentic. The scholars of this Hadith have classified it as Ahad Hadith. Ahad Hadith is generally reported by a single Companion of the Prophet and did not become well-known in the immediate two or three generations, does not give positive knowledge, is of speculative authenticity and therefore falls under the category of speculative proofs. Moreover, what is established in Quran cannot be restricted or discarded by Ahad Hadith. 

    Apart from being an isolated one, Maulana Umar Ahmed Usmani has held that this Hadith existed before the Battle of Camel in which Hazrat Aisha, wife of the Prophet, participated. Abu Bakr, the narrator of this Hadith recalls it only after the battle had started and Hazrat Aisha had assumed command of the army. Abu Bakr could have reported it much before, which is enough to prove that this Hadith was forged in the milieu of this battle. Hence, there is no strong argument to support that women cannot become head of the state or leaders.

    During the period of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), Muslim women were at the fore front taking part in socio-political activities. They performed significant duties during Jihad, for instance, treating the wounded. They used to give water to the people, serve them and also take the injured and deceased to Madina. (Bukhari) A model of bravery and courage of Muslim women was Hazrat Umme Umm’ara who saved Prophet from the enemy during the battle of Uhad and got seriously injured as a result. If these Muslim women would had confined to home then they could never had made such distinguished contribution. If this popular assumption is correct that women are imperfect in reasoning and religion then even the Caliph would not have entrusted vital duties to women and consulted them and there could be no instance of any women in the history of Islam who achieved great fame in the Qur’anic exegesis, science of Hadith, jurisprudence and literature. In fact, some Muslim women were known for issuing regular Fatwa. However, this has been seriously lacking now we can hardly witness women holding such important position in the present era. Hence, there is dire need to re-store to Muslim women their own historic identity.

    (Shazia Shaikh is an Assistant Professor at Ismail Yusuf College and works keenly on social issues. She is the author of a famous and recently published book “A Critical Analysis of Fatwas Issued on Muslim Women in India”. Her email id is shaishazia@gmail.com)

    The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect BH’s editorial policy.