From BBC News (South Asia):
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7473019.stm
Islam and Hinduism's blurred lines
By Jyotsna Singh
BBC News, Ajmer, Rajasthan
Forty-two-year-old Sohan Singh is delighted to call himself a "full-fledged" Hindu.
Recently he cremated his mother, defying a family tradition of burying their dead.
Mr Singh is a member of the Kathat community in Rajasthan and follows what his community believes is a pledge undertaken by their forefathers.
Legend has it that the Mehrat, Kathat and Cheeta communities - with a combined total of one million people in four districts of central Rajasthan - are the descendants of the Hindu ruler of the warrior caste, Prithviraj Chauhan.
The three communities also have strong Islamic connections, because many centuries ago, their forefathers undertook a pledge to follow three Muslim practices.
These include the circumcision for the newborn male children in the community, eating halal meat and burying their dead.
That is the tradition many have followed, keeping the word of their ancestors. But it has also led to them facing something of a faith-based identity crisis.
Mixed identity
At a bustling market in Masuda town, a large number of people from the Mehrat community gather every day.
A majority of them are poor and illiterate. They are people with a mixed Hindu-Muslim identity. And left alone, that is how they would like to be.
Deepa, 60, has a Hindu name but he thinks he is a Muslim because he follows Muslim practices.
"In my family, we celebrate Hindu festivals such as Holi and Diwali. But we also offer namaz (prayers) at (the Muslim festival of) Eid. We worship both local gods and Allah. This has been a tradition in my family. I do not know whether my ancestors were Hindus or Muslims."
Another Mehrat member is Mahendra Singh who has a Hindu name.
"We don't care about being Hindu or Muslim. It is sheer politics," he says.
Barely, 15km (9 miles) from Byawar town, Rasool runs a tea shop. He says his great grandparents were Hindus. But somewhere along the line, they became Muslims.
"It wasn't such a big deal to be Hindu or Muslim," says Rasool. His son Shankar is named after a Hindu god but he says they consider themselves Muslims.
"We are clearly Muslims. Only one of my three sons has a wrong (Hindu) name. It's too late to change that. But it won't happen again in our family," says Madeena, Shankar's wife.
For 65-year-old Shanta - like many others in this area - religion has become an issue.
She has many relatives who are Muslims. But her son-in-law is associated with the Hindu hardline group, Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) and her decision to declare herself a Hindu has alienated her from many relatives.
"My son wonders, why are we born in this community where there is so much confusion? I have told my son to cremate me as Hindus would their dead. My relatives boycott us, but that's alright. I think our ancestors were forced to convert to Islam. We have to correct that," Shanta says.
'Homecoming'
Organisations such as the VHP say they are trying to end this confusion in the lives of the community by making them realise their true identity.
The group has organised several mass conversion events in the area in the past years under a programme called the "Homecoming" or "Ghar Wapsi".
"We remind them about their history, that they are actually the descendants of the Hindu warrior king Prithviraj Chauhan who lived in the 12th century and, therefore, they are Hindus," the VHP general Secretary in Byawar, Nitesh Goel says.
"Some ill practices have crept into their behaviour, but this can be purified and they can become Hindus again. These people are not Muslims, they only follow certain customs that are common to Muslims. They are Hindus at heart and, therefore, should return to the religion," he says.
Mr Goel insists his organisation is not carrying out any campaign for conversion or reconversion. "People contact us voluntarily," he says.
But the VHP's campaign has alerted Muslim groups in the area.
The state president of Jamaat-e-Islami, Salim Engineer, says until 20 years ago (when the VHP first began its campaign) Muslim groups were not even aware that there was any confusion with regard to their community.
"Many centuries ago, Mehrats declared themselves as Muslims. But they did not know what Islam was and so remained with the old culture. They do not follow Islam in an organised manner. The VHP is spreading hatred," Mr Engineer said.
He also justifies the campaign by Muslim groups like Tabliki Jamaat to "educate" Mehrats about Islam.
"We are doing what the government has failed to do. The Muslim community all over India is seeking modern education. Along with that, we are also educating them about their religion," he said.
Stress
This need to join organised religion is putting a lot of stress on families that have co-existed with members following their own customs. And religion so far has played little part in their lives.
Mange Ram Kathat was a staunch Hindu and then decided to become a Muslim because he felt a majority of his community were Muslims. He says he does not discriminate between the two religions but his daughter-in-law Jamna, a school teacher who follows Hinduism, is clearly upset.
"There is a lot of confusion in our household. There is tension between me and my husband because of my father-in-law," says Jamna.
She says that she also does not like her father-in law's Muslim outfit or his Islamic greetings.
"He should have remained a Hindu. Why did he do this?"
Though Mehrats are listed in the Other Backward Communities list and are as such entitled to benefits under the government's affirmative action policy, the community has little access to basic facilities such as schools or employment opportunities.
Barely 25 years ago, the community members had a lot more flexibility to switch between the religions.
But the harmonious mix of Hinduism and Islam which existed in the community for many centuries is now visibly under threat. [/b]
Islam and Hinduism's blurred lines
A Ban on Beef in India Is Not the Answer
The sacredness of cows in India might be a cliché, but it is deeply felt, rooted in the history of Hinduism. In Mumbai, one often encounters women selling grass to feed the cow they have in tow — for a few rupees, the donation affords not only a blessing, but also a chance to feel connected to the country’s farmland roots. The cow is divinely associated with Krishna, the cowherd, and considered a mother figure because of the milk it gives. One doesn’t go into an Indian branch of McDonald’s expecting to order a Big Mac.
And yet, beef has long been available at various Mumbai restaurants — from the burger at the iconic Leopold Cafe to the marrowbone curry popular at eateries in Muslim neighborhoods. This reflects the accommodation necessary in a city — and country — with such extraordinary diversity of religion, culture and wealth.
Last month, however, this changed. Beef dishes were forced off the menu when Maharashtra, the country’s second most populous state, which incorporates Mumbai, extended a ban on cow slaughter to bulls and oxen, and made the sale of beef punishable by up to five years in prison. A few weeks later, the state of Haryana passed similar legislation. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s office has suggested that such bills are models for other states to emulate.
The laws have affected more than just restaurants. Thousands of butchers and vendors, their livelihood abruptly suspended, have protested in Mumbai. The leather industry is in turmoil. Beef is consumed not only by Indian Muslims and Christians, but also by many low-caste Hindus, for whom it is an essential source of affordable protein. The poorest waste nothing, from beef innards to coagulated blood, while their religion pragmatically turns a blind eye. Low-caste Dalit Hindu students, and others, have organized beef-eating festivals to protest the infringement on their culture and identity.
With the recent re-criminalization of gay sex, bans on controversial books and films and even an injunction against the use of the colonial-era name “Bombay” instead of “Mumbai” in a Bollywood song, the new laws join a growing list of restrictions on personal freedom in India. Already, the police in the city of Malegaon have arrested three Muslim men accused of calf slaughter, and ordered livestock owners to submit mug shots of cows and bulls to a cattle registry, to create a record in case any of them go missing.
The Maharashtra law had been in limbo, awaiting the Indian president’s signature for 20 years, but was resurrected only after the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party came to power last year. This suggests its real purpose is to play to the party’s political base.
Some Hindu hard-liners insist the idea of eating beef was introduced by Muslim invaders, despite references to its consumption in ancient texts like the Vedas, written more than a millennium before the time of Muhammad. By eradicating this “alien” practice, they hope to return the country to values they hold dear as Hindus. “Our dream of ban on cow slaughter becomes a reality now,” Maharashtra’s chief minister tweeted upon passage of the new law.
Another problem with such bans is that aged or unwanted cattle must be looked after at great expense (presumably by the state) if they are not to waste away.
The only practical reason advanced by Maharashtrian officials for their law is that it will help farmers hold on to their cattle in hard times, when they might otherwise be tempted to sell. This motivation actually does have historical standing. In fact, it fits in perfectly with a theory on the origination of the beef taboo that the American anthropologist Marvin Harris proposed almost five decades ago.
Mr. Harris observed that more important than their value as milk producers, cattle in India formed the backbone of small-scale agriculture. They were used to plow fields, provide dung for fuel and fertilizer and produce calves to stock the herd. He noted that a family that consumed its cattle during a time of drought and famine was not able to recover afterward: They had lost the means to work the land. Over the years, farmers who preserved their cattle were the ones who survived, leading to this practice’s being gradually codified into religion.
This drama is still being played out in Maharashtra, which in recent years has experienced persistent and devastating drought. Although religious rules ensured that a farmer would no longer eat his cattle, he could still succumb to the modern equivalent — selling it for slaughter, usually at throwaway prices. The beef ban, then, can be interpreted as an extension of the religious proscription: Thou shalt neither eat nor sell thy cattle.
Unfortunately, the situation in Maharashtra has deteriorated past the point where such a ban will help. Previous governments have squandered billions of dollars on failed irrigation schemes, while encouraging water-intensive crops like sugar cane in drought-prone areas. Farmers are desperate: On average since 2011, there have been four suicides of Maharashtrian farmers every day. Rather than ancient proscriptions, they need a financial safety net and responsible agricultural policies in order to deal with the current situation and probably worse climate change effects to come.
Indian civilization has evolved over the centuries to include multiple diverse communities with competing interests. Despite its secular Constitution, India remains strikingly unequal. The government must make every effort to balance majority sentiments with minority needs. This is what the previous rules that restricted cow, but not bull, slaughter did.
Imposing ideals from a mythic past is not the answer. The true lesson to take away from history is how utilitarian goals can shape religious custom. Hinduism has always been a pragmatic religion; what today’s India needs is accommodation.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/18/opini ... 05309&_r=0
The sacredness of cows in India might be a cliché, but it is deeply felt, rooted in the history of Hinduism. In Mumbai, one often encounters women selling grass to feed the cow they have in tow — for a few rupees, the donation affords not only a blessing, but also a chance to feel connected to the country’s farmland roots. The cow is divinely associated with Krishna, the cowherd, and considered a mother figure because of the milk it gives. One doesn’t go into an Indian branch of McDonald’s expecting to order a Big Mac.
And yet, beef has long been available at various Mumbai restaurants — from the burger at the iconic Leopold Cafe to the marrowbone curry popular at eateries in Muslim neighborhoods. This reflects the accommodation necessary in a city — and country — with such extraordinary diversity of religion, culture and wealth.
Last month, however, this changed. Beef dishes were forced off the menu when Maharashtra, the country’s second most populous state, which incorporates Mumbai, extended a ban on cow slaughter to bulls and oxen, and made the sale of beef punishable by up to five years in prison. A few weeks later, the state of Haryana passed similar legislation. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s office has suggested that such bills are models for other states to emulate.
The laws have affected more than just restaurants. Thousands of butchers and vendors, their livelihood abruptly suspended, have protested in Mumbai. The leather industry is in turmoil. Beef is consumed not only by Indian Muslims and Christians, but also by many low-caste Hindus, for whom it is an essential source of affordable protein. The poorest waste nothing, from beef innards to coagulated blood, while their religion pragmatically turns a blind eye. Low-caste Dalit Hindu students, and others, have organized beef-eating festivals to protest the infringement on their culture and identity.
With the recent re-criminalization of gay sex, bans on controversial books and films and even an injunction against the use of the colonial-era name “Bombay” instead of “Mumbai” in a Bollywood song, the new laws join a growing list of restrictions on personal freedom in India. Already, the police in the city of Malegaon have arrested three Muslim men accused of calf slaughter, and ordered livestock owners to submit mug shots of cows and bulls to a cattle registry, to create a record in case any of them go missing.
The Maharashtra law had been in limbo, awaiting the Indian president’s signature for 20 years, but was resurrected only after the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party came to power last year. This suggests its real purpose is to play to the party’s political base.
Some Hindu hard-liners insist the idea of eating beef was introduced by Muslim invaders, despite references to its consumption in ancient texts like the Vedas, written more than a millennium before the time of Muhammad. By eradicating this “alien” practice, they hope to return the country to values they hold dear as Hindus. “Our dream of ban on cow slaughter becomes a reality now,” Maharashtra’s chief minister tweeted upon passage of the new law.
Another problem with such bans is that aged or unwanted cattle must be looked after at great expense (presumably by the state) if they are not to waste away.
The only practical reason advanced by Maharashtrian officials for their law is that it will help farmers hold on to their cattle in hard times, when they might otherwise be tempted to sell. This motivation actually does have historical standing. In fact, it fits in perfectly with a theory on the origination of the beef taboo that the American anthropologist Marvin Harris proposed almost five decades ago.
Mr. Harris observed that more important than their value as milk producers, cattle in India formed the backbone of small-scale agriculture. They were used to plow fields, provide dung for fuel and fertilizer and produce calves to stock the herd. He noted that a family that consumed its cattle during a time of drought and famine was not able to recover afterward: They had lost the means to work the land. Over the years, farmers who preserved their cattle were the ones who survived, leading to this practice’s being gradually codified into religion.
This drama is still being played out in Maharashtra, which in recent years has experienced persistent and devastating drought. Although religious rules ensured that a farmer would no longer eat his cattle, he could still succumb to the modern equivalent — selling it for slaughter, usually at throwaway prices. The beef ban, then, can be interpreted as an extension of the religious proscription: Thou shalt neither eat nor sell thy cattle.
Unfortunately, the situation in Maharashtra has deteriorated past the point where such a ban will help. Previous governments have squandered billions of dollars on failed irrigation schemes, while encouraging water-intensive crops like sugar cane in drought-prone areas. Farmers are desperate: On average since 2011, there have been four suicides of Maharashtrian farmers every day. Rather than ancient proscriptions, they need a financial safety net and responsible agricultural policies in order to deal with the current situation and probably worse climate change effects to come.
Indian civilization has evolved over the centuries to include multiple diverse communities with competing interests. Despite its secular Constitution, India remains strikingly unequal. The government must make every effort to balance majority sentiments with minority needs. This is what the previous rules that restricted cow, but not bull, slaughter did.
Imposing ideals from a mythic past is not the answer. The true lesson to take away from history is how utilitarian goals can shape religious custom. Hinduism has always been a pragmatic religion; what today’s India needs is accommodation.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/18/opini ... 05309&_r=0
India has 1.2 Billions Hindu they worship cows and do not eat meant but other cast like Christian and Muslims eats Beef meat Actually India export beef meat in comparison how much they eat ; last year Indian exported 4.3 billions tons meat and this number will go up by 200 millions this year!!Last month, however, this changed. Beef dishes were forced off the menu when Maharashtra, the country’s second most populous state, which incorporates Mumbai, extended a ban on cow slaughter to bulls and oxen, and made the sale of beef punishable by up to five years in prison
The most peoples who eats beef meats are Muslims and Christians Hindu does not eat that because they consider cows as holy animals and they worship cows. to me prohibiting Beef meat in Maharashtra will not does any better, peoples will find ways to eat beef meant same like Gujarat is a dry state, drinking, selling alcohols are prohibited but in Gujarat you can find alcohol every where!!.
India's Death Penalty
July 30 was a somber day for India — a day that called into question the application of the death penalty in a country whose criminal justice system is stacked against minorities, the poor and those who do not have the backing of powerful political interests.
On that day, Yakub Memon was executed. The same day last year, Maya Kodnani was released from jail. Just three years ago, Ms. Kodnani was sentenced to prison for 28 years for her role in an attack in Gujarat that left at least 94 people, all Muslims, dead during riots in 2002. She was also, however, a top lieutenant in the Gujarat state government once headed by the current prime minister, Narendra Modi. Mr. Memon had no such political connections. An accountant, he admitted to playing an accessory role in the 1993 bombings in Mumbai, masterminded by his brother “Tiger” Memon and Dawood Ibrahim, a Mumbai underworld boss. The bombings, which took the lives of 257 people and injured some 700 others, were set off in revenge for riots that engulfed the city in December 1992 following the destruction by Hindu militants of the Babri Mosque in the Indian city of Ayodhya. More than 1,000 people died in the Mumbai riots, most of them Muslims.
Mr. Memon’s execution has now set off a vigorous debate in India on capital punishment. While more than 1,300 Indians were condemned to die by Indian courts in the decade between 2004 and 2013, only three individuals have been executed. But the sentences reflect huge disparities in the treatment of the accused in the justice system. A study conducted by the National Law University in New Delhi, working with India’s Law Commission, has found that nearly all — 93.5 percent — of those sentenced to death are low-caste Dalits or members of other minorities. Most are poor. Many are illiterate. Few received adequate legal representation.
Such gross injustice should weigh heavily when India’s Supreme Court receives a full report on the death penalty expected from the Law Commission next month. In the meantime, the government should reinstate the moratorium on the death penalty while India works toward joining most of the world in abolishing state-sanctioned killing.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/06/opini ... 05309&_r=0
July 30 was a somber day for India — a day that called into question the application of the death penalty in a country whose criminal justice system is stacked against minorities, the poor and those who do not have the backing of powerful political interests.
On that day, Yakub Memon was executed. The same day last year, Maya Kodnani was released from jail. Just three years ago, Ms. Kodnani was sentenced to prison for 28 years for her role in an attack in Gujarat that left at least 94 people, all Muslims, dead during riots in 2002. She was also, however, a top lieutenant in the Gujarat state government once headed by the current prime minister, Narendra Modi. Mr. Memon had no such political connections. An accountant, he admitted to playing an accessory role in the 1993 bombings in Mumbai, masterminded by his brother “Tiger” Memon and Dawood Ibrahim, a Mumbai underworld boss. The bombings, which took the lives of 257 people and injured some 700 others, were set off in revenge for riots that engulfed the city in December 1992 following the destruction by Hindu militants of the Babri Mosque in the Indian city of Ayodhya. More than 1,000 people died in the Mumbai riots, most of them Muslims.
Mr. Memon’s execution has now set off a vigorous debate in India on capital punishment. While more than 1,300 Indians were condemned to die by Indian courts in the decade between 2004 and 2013, only three individuals have been executed. But the sentences reflect huge disparities in the treatment of the accused in the justice system. A study conducted by the National Law University in New Delhi, working with India’s Law Commission, has found that nearly all — 93.5 percent — of those sentenced to death are low-caste Dalits or members of other minorities. Most are poor. Many are illiterate. Few received adequate legal representation.
Such gross injustice should weigh heavily when India’s Supreme Court receives a full report on the death penalty expected from the Law Commission next month. In the meantime, the government should reinstate the moratorium on the death penalty while India works toward joining most of the world in abolishing state-sanctioned killing.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/06/opini ... 05309&_r=0
-
mazharshah
- Posts: 263
- Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2015 5:08 pm
kmaherali wrote:India's Death Penalty
July 30 was a somber day for India — a day that called into question the application of the death penalty in a country whose criminal justice system is stacked against minorities, the poor and those who do not have the backing of powerful political interests.
On that day, Yakub Memon was executed. The same day last year, Maya Kodnani was released from jail. Just three years ago, Ms. Kodnani was sentenced to prison for 28 years for her role in an attack in Gujarat that left at least 94 people, all Muslims, dead during riots in 2002. She was also, however, a top lieutenant in the Gujarat state government once headed by the current prime minister, Narendra Modi. Mr. Memon had no such political connections. An accountant, he admitted to playing an accessory role in the 1993 bombings in Mumbai, masterminded by his brother “Tiger” Memon and Dawood Ibrahim, a Mumbai underworld boss. The bombings, which took the lives of 257 people and injured some 700 others, were set off in revenge for riots that engulfed the city in December 1992 following the destruction by Hindu militants of the Babri Mosque in the Indian city of Ayodhya. More than 1,000 people died in the Mumbai riots, most of them Muslims.
Mr. Memon’s execution has now set off a vigorous debate in India on capital punishment. While more than 1,300 Indians were condemned to die by Indian courts in the decade between 2004 and 2013, only three individuals have been executed. But the sentences reflect huge disparities in the treatment of the accused in the justice system. A study conducted by the National Law University in New Delhi, working with India’s Law Commission, has found that nearly all — 93.5 percent — of those sentenced to death are low-caste Dalits or members of other minorities. Most are poor. Many are illiterate. Few received adequate legal representation.
Such gross injustice should weigh heavily when India’s Supreme Court receives a full report on the death penalty expected from the Law Commission next month. In the meantime, the government should reinstate the moratorium on the death penalty while India works toward joining most of the world in abolishing state-sanctioned killing.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/06/opini ... 05309&_r=0
Unless and until muslims are not united on one plate farm they will be beaten and killed. MIGHT IS RIGHT.
Ya Ali Madad:
I ask KMaherali why n what for this article is being posted here. the facts of cases papers runs into 1000 of pages?
what type of justice is to Given is based on the statue in penal codes of those country.
Here it is made to look like muslims, hindus enemity n strife.
then the reply n repostings of hate/unity/lesson blah blah starts.
I assume you as a wise n polite haqiqati on the forum.
be careful,selective what is posted on this site may be considered as view point to total Ismailis of the world.
EVIL IS ENEMY OF HUMANITY N GOD,PLEASE DO NOT PUT RELIGIOUS COLOUR TO IT.
You are not the spokesperson for all Ismailis.
I ask KMaherali why n what for this article is being posted here. the facts of cases papers runs into 1000 of pages?
what type of justice is to Given is based on the statue in penal codes of those country.
Here it is made to look like muslims, hindus enemity n strife.
then the reply n repostings of hate/unity/lesson blah blah starts.
I assume you as a wise n polite haqiqati on the forum.
be careful,selective what is posted on this site may be considered as view point to total Ismailis of the world.
EVIL IS ENEMY OF HUMANITY N GOD,PLEASE DO NOT PUT RELIGIOUS COLOUR TO IT.
You are not the spokesperson for all Ismailis.
Ya Ali Madad nuserinuseri wrote:Ya Ali Madad:
I ask KMaherali why n what for this article is being posted here. the facts of cases papers runs into 1000 of pages?
is.
This thread is about the relationship between Muslims and Hindus in India. The article from a reputable newspaper reflects that as portrayed in the justice system.
Are you suggesting that anything that shows disunity or disharmony should not be posted and assume that all is well and fine. Do you feel that the facts given are incorrect? If do produce your own facts.
We are a global Jamat and our institutions operate there as well. Don't you think it is good information for the Jamat and leaders around the world to know about the governing environments of various countries?
Also publicising injustice can help to redress the situation. Why do you think that the leading newspaper published this in it's editorial? Do you think it was meant to create problem or to make everyone aware of the reality so that a solution can be found?
BTW, I am not representing anybody here. You are free to express your disagreement. It is fine with me.
To Kmaherali: Ya Ali Madad.
There is one official site of Imamat and 3 more well visited Ismaili Intrest websites.
They have not posted any of this or akin to it news extract.
This article does not tell the full story.and anything which appears in NY times is taken be taken for granted as credible.
This article has religious strife with political overtone.
Under guidance of MHI,We Ismailis rise above such communal/ religious
conflict and political overtone related to it.
we in many matters rise above commonsense,rational sense,cleverness with our Intellect.
It is good to see you r educating institution and our leaders on this.
You select good articles n enlighten reader on ongoing basis.
Many are generalized in sense.
I personally feel this article may not be seen as generalize but as sensitive in nature.
A question need to be asked does our Imam desire a Debate from it momins
on sensitive issues? related to one country where MHI was recently honored with highest civilian award given to a Non Indian national.
I still do not know what this forum invites n accept from it's member.
There is one official site of Imamat and 3 more well visited Ismaili Intrest websites.
They have not posted any of this or akin to it news extract.
This article does not tell the full story.and anything which appears in NY times is taken be taken for granted as credible.
This article has religious strife with political overtone.
Under guidance of MHI,We Ismailis rise above such communal/ religious
conflict and political overtone related to it.
we in many matters rise above commonsense,rational sense,cleverness with our Intellect.
It is good to see you r educating institution and our leaders on this.
You select good articles n enlighten reader on ongoing basis.
Many are generalized in sense.
I personally feel this article may not be seen as generalize but as sensitive in nature.
A question need to be asked does our Imam desire a Debate from it momins
on sensitive issues? related to one country where MHI was recently honored with highest civilian award given to a Non Indian national.
I still do not know what this forum invites n accept from it's member.
I don't consider this issue as being sensitive. Even within India thestate of the system is being debated. It is not that things are hidden from the public. The article is hoping that things can get corrected after the commission's report.nuseri wrote:To Kmaherali: Ya Ali Madad.
A question need to be asked does our Imam desire a Debate from it momins
on sensitive issues? related to one country where MHI was recently honored with highest civilian award given to a Non Indian national.
I still do not know what this forum invites n accept from it's member.
If there is heightened awareness of this issue within the Jamat, then we can perhaps influence change given the respect the Imam has been given.
What about the ban on meat? Don't you think that is discriminatory. What about the recent move to make the Gita as the national literary work. Don't you think that these actions are against Muslims and other minorities?
I think a healthy debate generates greater awareness and understanding of the issues.
I don't consider this issue as being sensitive. Even within India thestate of the system is being debated. It is not that things are hidden from the public. The article is hoping that things can get corrected after the commission's report.nuseri wrote:To Kmaherali: Ya Ali Madad.
A question need to be asked does our Imam desire a Debate from it momins
on sensitive issues? related to one country where MHI was recently honored with highest civilian award given to a Non Indian national.
I still do not know what this forum invites n accept from it's member.
If there is heightened awareness of this issue within the Jamat, then we can perhaps influence change given the respect the Imam has been given.
What about the ban on meat? Don't you think that is discriminatory. What about the recent move to make the Gita as the national literary work. Don't you think that these actions are against Muslims and other minorities?
I think a healthy debate generates greater awareness and understanding of the issues.
-
mazharshah
- Posts: 263
- Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2015 5:08 pm
Admin wrote:How are Muslim going to be united. Actually there are more Muslims killing Muslims than anyone else killing Muslim. "Islam the best religion, Muslims the worse people" said someone.
You are right muslims are good at killing each other and are not recognizing their true enemies. I believe iron cuts iron. I wished Prophet should have clearly settled the issue in his life time who will lead the ummah after him. He should have clearly mentioned the name and had baiyat in Mecca and Madina in his presence.
-
agakhani_1
- Posts: 278
- Joined: Wed May 20, 2015 7:57 am
Yes, He did actually prophet Mohd already cleared and had settled that issue that who will lead the Muslim Ummah after his death in that historical event of Ghadir a Khum!I wished Prophet should have clearly settled the issue in his life time who will lead the ummah after him. He should have clearly mentioned the name and had baiyat in Mecca and Madina in his presence.
but before that historical events prophet Mohd had already gave many evidences and proofs which were enough to declared H. Ali (s.a.) as his
" Wasi who will lead after his demises!! History is full about these things and about these kind evidences look the wars, who was always stayed behind prophet Mohd? remember that war name Jang e Khandak! where were those three caliphs? FYI they were ran away from that war!!
It is injustice toward H. Ali even history are full about his braveness and many prophet's evidences which are clearly declared him as his successors but ... many Muslims brother intentionally ignores these kind facts in favors to H. Abu Bakar, H. Umar and H. usman!!
Question arise here you always consider your shelf as an Ismaili !!( which I always doubted) but a true Ismailis always knows these facts which I mentioned above from their childhood!
are you really an ....!!!???-
junglikhan4
- Posts: 208
- Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2015 7:09 pm
nuseri wrote:Ya Ali Madad:
I ask KMaherali why n what for this article is being posted here. the facts of cases papers runs into 1000 of pages?
what type of justice is to Given is based on the statue in penal codes of those country.
Here it is made to look like muslims, hindus enemity n strife.
then the reply n repostings of hate/unity/lesson blah blah starts.
I assume you as a wise n polite haqiqati on the forum.
be careful,selective what is posted on this site may be considered as view point to total Ismailis of the world.
EVIL IS ENEMY OF HUMANITY N GOD,PLEASE DO NOT PUT RELIGIOUS COLOUR TO IT.
You are not the spokesperson for all Ismailis.
Reply,
I heard after demolition of Babari Masjid scores of Ismailis were massacred in Pune and Naagpur area. What is your opinion about that. We are peaceful community.
-
junglikhan4
- Posts: 208
- Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2015 7:09 pm
agakhani wrote:Yes, He did actually prophet Mohd already cleared and had settled that issue that who will lead the Muslim Ummah after his death in that historical event of Ghadir a Khum!I wished Prophet should have clearly settled the issue in his life time who will lead the ummah after him. He should have clearly mentioned the name and had baiyat in Mecca and Madina in his presence.
but before that historical events prophet Mohd had already gave many evidences and proofs which were enough to declared H. Ali (s.a.) as his
" Wasi who will lead after his demises!! History is full about these things and about these kind evidences look the wars, who was always stayed behind prophet Mohd? remember that war name Jang e Khandak! where were those three caliphs? FYI they were ran away from that war!!
It is injustice toward H. Ali even history are full about his braveness and many prophet's evidences which are clearly declared him as his successors but ... many Muslims brother intentionally ignores these kind facts in favors to H. Abu Bakar, H. Umar and H. usman!!
Question arise here you always consider your shelf as an Ismaili !!( which I always doubted) but a true Ismailis always knows these facts which I mentioned above from their childhood!
Reply,
I am talking about muslim ummah and not only shias. I am writing in general terms and not about Ismaili philosophy. Sunnis say at Ghadir khum Prophet never mentioned Hazrat Ali as Caliph or Imam, except the famous hadith of "Mon tu Mawla" and other declarations. You have habit of not reading the complete post and without understanding and thinking start writing what ever comes to your mind. You don't have to worry about whether I am an Ismaili or not. Iss gum me dubla hooney ki zarurat nahi.
-
mahebubchatur
- Posts: 734
- Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 7:01 pm
Re Imam Imamat and need for continuity of guidance..
Please read the following and we know that there are literally thousands of interpretations By different schools of thought, and in Hadiths and for Ismailis in Farmans by Successive Imams. There was a reason why some matters need guidance - Tawil. http://www.ismaili.net/html/modules.php ... pic&t=8672
Modi and the Hindu Hard-Liners
Since he was elected in May 2014, Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India has been adept at appeasing his Hindu hard-line base while, at the same time, promising economic growth and development to a wider national and international audience. But that balancing act is in danger of teetering, imperiling not only the economic development Mr. Modi has promised but also India’s open, inclusive democracy.
The latest alarming sign of the Hindu right’s growing boldness was the Sept. 28 lynching of a Muslim man by an angry mob. The attack, which occurred in the village of Bisada, just 30 miles from India’s capital city, New Delhi, was instigated by local Hindu men, many linked to the governing Bharatiya Janata Party.
On the strength of a baseless rumor that a cow — considered sacred by Hindus — had been killed in the area and that a local Muslim family was eating beef, a furious mob descended on the family’s home, killing 52-year-old Mohammed Ikhlaq and severely injuring his son. Another son, Sartaj, an active member of India’s Air Force, admirably appealed for calm after the attack.
Photo
Indians took part in a vigil in memory of the Muslim man who was killed by a mob earlier this month.Credit Altaf Qadri/Associated Press
Although Mr Modi denied that his party had anything to do with the episode, his public aloofness as officials in his government and extremists across the country have aggressively pushed a Hindu nationalist agenda is partly to blame. So are the prime minister’s efforts to make cow slaughter a divisive political issue. During his election campaign Mr. Modi had warned Hindu voters that if the Congress Party gained control, it would expand a “pink revolution” of cow slaughter.
Last week, at a political rally in Bihar, where hotly contested state elections began on Monday, Mr. Modi slammed the opposition politician Lalu Prasad, suggesting he was possessed by a “devil” for “insulting” Yadavs, an important clan in Bihar, by suggesting they eat beef. In contrast, Mr. Modi boasted that “I come from the land of Gujarat,” where “people worship cows.”
Faced with mounting outrage at his silence on the brutal lynching, Mr. Modi finally managed to refer directly to the attack on Wednesday, calling it “sad” and “unwelcome.” In comments to a Bengali-language newspaper, he declared: “The B.J.P. has never supported such incidents.” This message is welcome but it comes late.
Mr. Modi should keep in mind the wise words of India’s president, Pranab Mukherjee, in an eloquent plea for sanity last week. “We cannot allow the core values of our civilization to be wasted,” Mr. Mukherjee warned, adding, “This civilization has celebrated diversity, promoted and advocated tolerance, endurance and plurality.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/15/opini ... 05309&_r=0
Since he was elected in May 2014, Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India has been adept at appeasing his Hindu hard-line base while, at the same time, promising economic growth and development to a wider national and international audience. But that balancing act is in danger of teetering, imperiling not only the economic development Mr. Modi has promised but also India’s open, inclusive democracy.
The latest alarming sign of the Hindu right’s growing boldness was the Sept. 28 lynching of a Muslim man by an angry mob. The attack, which occurred in the village of Bisada, just 30 miles from India’s capital city, New Delhi, was instigated by local Hindu men, many linked to the governing Bharatiya Janata Party.
On the strength of a baseless rumor that a cow — considered sacred by Hindus — had been killed in the area and that a local Muslim family was eating beef, a furious mob descended on the family’s home, killing 52-year-old Mohammed Ikhlaq and severely injuring his son. Another son, Sartaj, an active member of India’s Air Force, admirably appealed for calm after the attack.
Photo
Indians took part in a vigil in memory of the Muslim man who was killed by a mob earlier this month.Credit Altaf Qadri/Associated Press
Although Mr Modi denied that his party had anything to do with the episode, his public aloofness as officials in his government and extremists across the country have aggressively pushed a Hindu nationalist agenda is partly to blame. So are the prime minister’s efforts to make cow slaughter a divisive political issue. During his election campaign Mr. Modi had warned Hindu voters that if the Congress Party gained control, it would expand a “pink revolution” of cow slaughter.
Last week, at a political rally in Bihar, where hotly contested state elections began on Monday, Mr. Modi slammed the opposition politician Lalu Prasad, suggesting he was possessed by a “devil” for “insulting” Yadavs, an important clan in Bihar, by suggesting they eat beef. In contrast, Mr. Modi boasted that “I come from the land of Gujarat,” where “people worship cows.”
Faced with mounting outrage at his silence on the brutal lynching, Mr. Modi finally managed to refer directly to the attack on Wednesday, calling it “sad” and “unwelcome.” In comments to a Bengali-language newspaper, he declared: “The B.J.P. has never supported such incidents.” This message is welcome but it comes late.
Mr. Modi should keep in mind the wise words of India’s president, Pranab Mukherjee, in an eloquent plea for sanity last week. “We cannot allow the core values of our civilization to be wasted,” Mr. Mukherjee warned, adding, “This civilization has celebrated diversity, promoted and advocated tolerance, endurance and plurality.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/15/opini ... 05309&_r=0
The cow was neither unslayable nor sacred in the Vedic period’
Interview with D.N. Jha, the historian of ancient and medieval India and the author of Holy Cow: Beef in Indian Dietary Traditions and The Myth of the Holy Cow. By AJOY ASHIRWAD MAHAPRASHASTA
The issue of cow slaughter and beef consumption is once again in the eye of a political storm. Hindutva ideologues, aided by the government, have successfully mounted cow-protection programmes across the country and are in the process of using the cow as a political symbol to polarise Hindu and Muslim communities. Frontline spoke to D.N. Jha, the eminent historian of ancient and medieval India, on the food practices in India over the centuries and the place of the cow within these systems. Jha has published numerous seminal books on ancient and medieval India.
His books Holy Cow: Beef in Indian Dietary Traditions (2002) and The Myth of the Holy Cow (2009) drew upon vast historical sources to establish the practice of beef consumption from ancient India onwards, thus dispelling the Hindutva myth that the practice of beef-eating was introduced during Islamic rule in India. His books attracted considerable controversy and Jha also received death threats from Hindu extremists for positing the theory. He explains how popular myths about the cow and beef-eating were systematically etched into the nation’s memory by Hindutva extremists and speaks about their larger political interests in rewriting history. Excerpts from an email interview:
http://www.frontline.in/cover-story/the ... 756917.ece
Pankaj Mishra finds the roots of post-Partition conflict in DN Jha's account of India's sacred cows, The Myth of the Holy Cow
http://www.theguardian.com/books/2002/j ... reducation
Interview with D.N. Jha, the historian of ancient and medieval India and the author of Holy Cow: Beef in Indian Dietary Traditions and The Myth of the Holy Cow. By AJOY ASHIRWAD MAHAPRASHASTA
The issue of cow slaughter and beef consumption is once again in the eye of a political storm. Hindutva ideologues, aided by the government, have successfully mounted cow-protection programmes across the country and are in the process of using the cow as a political symbol to polarise Hindu and Muslim communities. Frontline spoke to D.N. Jha, the eminent historian of ancient and medieval India, on the food practices in India over the centuries and the place of the cow within these systems. Jha has published numerous seminal books on ancient and medieval India.
His books Holy Cow: Beef in Indian Dietary Traditions (2002) and The Myth of the Holy Cow (2009) drew upon vast historical sources to establish the practice of beef consumption from ancient India onwards, thus dispelling the Hindutva myth that the practice of beef-eating was introduced during Islamic rule in India. His books attracted considerable controversy and Jha also received death threats from Hindu extremists for positing the theory. He explains how popular myths about the cow and beef-eating were systematically etched into the nation’s memory by Hindutva extremists and speaks about their larger political interests in rewriting history. Excerpts from an email interview:
http://www.frontline.in/cover-story/the ... 756917.ece
Pankaj Mishra finds the roots of post-Partition conflict in DN Jha's account of India's sacred cows, The Myth of the Holy Cow
http://www.theguardian.com/books/2002/j ... reducation
India, France and Secularism
The Indian organizers of two concerts by Ghulam Ali, a veteran Pakistani singer, did not want to take chances. They had received local government assurances about security for the Oct. 9 and 10 concerts in Mumbai and Pune. But faced with protests from a regional right-wing Hindu party, Shiv Sena, they decided to cancel the shows. “You know the Shiv Sena people,” the manager of one of the venues explained. “They may still create troubles.”
A few days later Sudheendra Kulkarni, chairman of the Observer Research Foundation, an Indian think tank, was attacked in his car by a group of “Shiv Sena people” who doused him with oily black ink. He had been due to take part in a book launch by a former Pakistani foreign minister, Khurshid Mehmood Kasuri, an event the foundation had refused to cancel. He still appeared with the author, his head blackened and his clothes soiled, his face almost unrecognizable, to condemn this “attack on democracy,” before going to the hospital to have the ink removed.
Intolerance is on the rise in India, where the number of attacks on minorities, particularly Muslims, and on secularist intellectuals by Hindu chauvinists is part of a disturbing trend. Even more disturbing has been the reluctance of the governing party, the nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party, to speak against violent assaults, like the barbaric killing of a 52-year-old Muslim man, Mohammad Ikhlaq, dragged from his home on Sept. 28 in a village near New Delhi and beaten to death by a mob that suspected him of storing beef meat in his fridge. It took more than two weeks for Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the leader who campaigned on inclusive development, to utter a word about the murder. And when he did, his comments were embarrassingly weak: He could only find the incident “really sad” and blame the opposition’s “pseudo-secularism."
Secularism is, precisely, at the heart of the debate in Mr. Modi’s India. Coming from a country, France, with strong feelings about secularism, or laïcité, I was intrigued to see how it is managed in a nation of 1.25 billion people with a 14.2 percent Muslim minority when I took part earlier this month in a study trip in India set up by the European Council on Foreign Relations.
Like the French, Indians tend to consider secularism as part of their national identity. It is engrained in both constitutions. “If we are less secular, we are less Indian,” said Tarun Vijay, a B.J.P. member of Parliament and one of the party’s ideologues. But while the foundation of French laïcité is to keep the government neutral in religious affairs, the Indian version of secularism “allows state intervention in the dominant religion” — Hinduism — and recognizes minority rights, Professor Niraja Gopal Jayal of Jawaharlal Nehru University told us.
Emboldened by its electoral success, which brought Mr. Modi to power in May 2014, the B.J.P.’s powerful ideological parent, a social organization called R.S.S. (Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh) thus tends to equate secularism with Hindu rule: They would not mind it if the state were allowed to intervene in the affairs of all religions. France, in turn, has enforced laïcité in the public sphere more rigorously with the rise of Islam. It imposed a ban on all religious signs from public schools when the Muslim head scarf became an issue, but girls can wear a head scarf anywhere else, and Jewish boys are free to wear a yarmulke off school grounds. Burqas are banned in public space. A few right-wing politicians are now resisting the idea of school menus offering an alternative to pork, but they don’t get much traction.
Hindu fundamentalists have a more radical view of beef consumption and the slaughtering of cows. Some states, like Maharashtra, have banned the sale of beef, and calls for a national beef ban are growing. The fact that Muslims and Christians are traditional beef eaters is not an obstacle. The B.J.P.’s Tarun Vijay, expressing a more stringent interpretation of secularism on the opinion website Daily 0, sees “beef eating as a challenge to India, its public display as an act of bravado,” adding, “It is a political act that has nothing to do with culinary practice or religion.”
In both countries Muslim minorities complain about discrimination — and with reason. But while many French Muslims, who make up about 7.5 percent of the population, feel targeted by “laïcité,” Indian Muslims see secularism as their best protection. One important difference is that radicalization is an almost nonexistent phenomenon in Indian Islam, while it is a dangerous (but limited) trend among European Muslims. Only 30 Indian citizens are known to have joined the Islamic State so far, out of 176 million Muslims; in France, the number of home-grown jihadists is close to 2,000, out of 4 to 5 million. So while in France, fundamentalism comes from the Muslim minority, in India it comes from the Hindu majority.
India has been home to Muslims since the 8th century; Mughals ruled most of India and Pakistan 400 years ago. In contrast, Islam’s implantation in Europe is only a few decades old; France’s law on laïcité predates their arrival. Today, as minorities, Muslims feel vulnerable. In France, the January terrorist attacks against Charlie Hebdo and a Jewish supermarket deepened the malaise, as many Muslims stayed away from the #JeSuisCharlie movement. When 4 million French people took to the streets in support of freedom of expression right after the attacks, they assumed that French Muslims would make a point to be part of this show of unity. Only a small number did. For many of those who did not show up, laïcité has gone too far. Allowing cartoonists to make fun of religious figures, including their Prophet, may be a French tradition; it is not their idea of secularism.
In India, the threat against secularism goes even deeper, down to the values dear to its founding fathers, Gandhi and Nehru. “This is an India which is crying out for a Mahatma who puts compassion and tolerance above all else,” wrote the well-known journalist Rajdeep Sardesai after the recent attacks. An India that could rally behind #JeSuisIkhlaq.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/28/opini ... pe=article
The Indian organizers of two concerts by Ghulam Ali, a veteran Pakistani singer, did not want to take chances. They had received local government assurances about security for the Oct. 9 and 10 concerts in Mumbai and Pune. But faced with protests from a regional right-wing Hindu party, Shiv Sena, they decided to cancel the shows. “You know the Shiv Sena people,” the manager of one of the venues explained. “They may still create troubles.”
A few days later Sudheendra Kulkarni, chairman of the Observer Research Foundation, an Indian think tank, was attacked in his car by a group of “Shiv Sena people” who doused him with oily black ink. He had been due to take part in a book launch by a former Pakistani foreign minister, Khurshid Mehmood Kasuri, an event the foundation had refused to cancel. He still appeared with the author, his head blackened and his clothes soiled, his face almost unrecognizable, to condemn this “attack on democracy,” before going to the hospital to have the ink removed.
Intolerance is on the rise in India, where the number of attacks on minorities, particularly Muslims, and on secularist intellectuals by Hindu chauvinists is part of a disturbing trend. Even more disturbing has been the reluctance of the governing party, the nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party, to speak against violent assaults, like the barbaric killing of a 52-year-old Muslim man, Mohammad Ikhlaq, dragged from his home on Sept. 28 in a village near New Delhi and beaten to death by a mob that suspected him of storing beef meat in his fridge. It took more than two weeks for Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the leader who campaigned on inclusive development, to utter a word about the murder. And when he did, his comments were embarrassingly weak: He could only find the incident “really sad” and blame the opposition’s “pseudo-secularism."
Secularism is, precisely, at the heart of the debate in Mr. Modi’s India. Coming from a country, France, with strong feelings about secularism, or laïcité, I was intrigued to see how it is managed in a nation of 1.25 billion people with a 14.2 percent Muslim minority when I took part earlier this month in a study trip in India set up by the European Council on Foreign Relations.
Like the French, Indians tend to consider secularism as part of their national identity. It is engrained in both constitutions. “If we are less secular, we are less Indian,” said Tarun Vijay, a B.J.P. member of Parliament and one of the party’s ideologues. But while the foundation of French laïcité is to keep the government neutral in religious affairs, the Indian version of secularism “allows state intervention in the dominant religion” — Hinduism — and recognizes minority rights, Professor Niraja Gopal Jayal of Jawaharlal Nehru University told us.
Emboldened by its electoral success, which brought Mr. Modi to power in May 2014, the B.J.P.’s powerful ideological parent, a social organization called R.S.S. (Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh) thus tends to equate secularism with Hindu rule: They would not mind it if the state were allowed to intervene in the affairs of all religions. France, in turn, has enforced laïcité in the public sphere more rigorously with the rise of Islam. It imposed a ban on all religious signs from public schools when the Muslim head scarf became an issue, but girls can wear a head scarf anywhere else, and Jewish boys are free to wear a yarmulke off school grounds. Burqas are banned in public space. A few right-wing politicians are now resisting the idea of school menus offering an alternative to pork, but they don’t get much traction.
Hindu fundamentalists have a more radical view of beef consumption and the slaughtering of cows. Some states, like Maharashtra, have banned the sale of beef, and calls for a national beef ban are growing. The fact that Muslims and Christians are traditional beef eaters is not an obstacle. The B.J.P.’s Tarun Vijay, expressing a more stringent interpretation of secularism on the opinion website Daily 0, sees “beef eating as a challenge to India, its public display as an act of bravado,” adding, “It is a political act that has nothing to do with culinary practice or religion.”
In both countries Muslim minorities complain about discrimination — and with reason. But while many French Muslims, who make up about 7.5 percent of the population, feel targeted by “laïcité,” Indian Muslims see secularism as their best protection. One important difference is that radicalization is an almost nonexistent phenomenon in Indian Islam, while it is a dangerous (but limited) trend among European Muslims. Only 30 Indian citizens are known to have joined the Islamic State so far, out of 176 million Muslims; in France, the number of home-grown jihadists is close to 2,000, out of 4 to 5 million. So while in France, fundamentalism comes from the Muslim minority, in India it comes from the Hindu majority.
India has been home to Muslims since the 8th century; Mughals ruled most of India and Pakistan 400 years ago. In contrast, Islam’s implantation in Europe is only a few decades old; France’s law on laïcité predates their arrival. Today, as minorities, Muslims feel vulnerable. In France, the January terrorist attacks against Charlie Hebdo and a Jewish supermarket deepened the malaise, as many Muslims stayed away from the #JeSuisCharlie movement. When 4 million French people took to the streets in support of freedom of expression right after the attacks, they assumed that French Muslims would make a point to be part of this show of unity. Only a small number did. For many of those who did not show up, laïcité has gone too far. Allowing cartoonists to make fun of religious figures, including their Prophet, may be a French tradition; it is not their idea of secularism.
In India, the threat against secularism goes even deeper, down to the values dear to its founding fathers, Gandhi and Nehru. “This is an India which is crying out for a Mahatma who puts compassion and tolerance above all else,” wrote the well-known journalist Rajdeep Sardesai after the recent attacks. An India that could rally behind #JeSuisIkhlaq.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/28/opini ... pe=article
Aamir Khan should go to Pakistan, says Shiv Sena leader
Senior Shiv Sena leader and Maharashtra Environment Minister Ramdas Kadam on Tuesday slammed Bollywood actor Aamir Khan's "alarm" over extremism in India, saying he should "go to Pakistan" if "he does not want to stay here", The Hindu reported.
The Indian actor on Monday had said he was "alarmed and shaken" by the number of incidents related to extremism in India.
Sena's Ramdas Kadam said, "He was a celebrated actor till now. But now it seems that we handed over milk to a snake. If he does not want to stay here, he can go to Pakistan."
Addressing an audience at the Ramnath Goenka journalism awards, Khan had said that he and his wife Kiran Rao do not feel the country safe for their children.
"When I chat with Kiran at home, she says ‘Should we move out of India?’ That’s a disastrous and big statement for Kiran to make. She fears for her child. She fears about what the atmosphere around us will be. She feels scared to open the newspapers every day."
Khan claimed that his sense of insecurity has increased in the past few months and laid stress upon the people in power to strongly condemn such incidents.
Security outside his home has been ramped up since he made the above statements.
http://www.dawn.com/news/1222160
*******
Shiv Sena announces INR100,000 reward for 'slapping Aamir Khan'
LUDHIANA: In a troubling development, the Punjab chapter of Indian far-right political group Shiv Sena announced a cash reward of INR 100,000 for "anyone who slaps" Bollywood actor Aamir Khan over his recent remarks on 'intolerance' in India, said a report published on the Hindustan Times.
The bizarre announcement was made during a protest staged by Shiv Sena activists outside a hotel where Aamir Khan is staying for shooting his upcoming movie 'Dangal'.
Examine: Aamir Khan should go to Pakistan, says Shiv Sena leader
During the protest, Shiv Sena activists used derogatory language against the actor and burnt his photographs.
The report quoted Shiv Sena Punjab chairman Rajeev Tandon, who was leading the protesters, as saying: “Any person who slaps Aamir Khan would be rewarded Rs1 lakh (INR 100,000) by our organisation. This is important because no one living in our country should dare to say anything against India.”
“Anyone from the hotel staff to the crew can slap him and take the reward,” he was quoted as saying.
http://www.dawn.com/news/1222431/shiv-s ... aamir-khan
Senior Shiv Sena leader and Maharashtra Environment Minister Ramdas Kadam on Tuesday slammed Bollywood actor Aamir Khan's "alarm" over extremism in India, saying he should "go to Pakistan" if "he does not want to stay here", The Hindu reported.
The Indian actor on Monday had said he was "alarmed and shaken" by the number of incidents related to extremism in India.
Sena's Ramdas Kadam said, "He was a celebrated actor till now. But now it seems that we handed over milk to a snake. If he does not want to stay here, he can go to Pakistan."
Addressing an audience at the Ramnath Goenka journalism awards, Khan had said that he and his wife Kiran Rao do not feel the country safe for their children.
"When I chat with Kiran at home, she says ‘Should we move out of India?’ That’s a disastrous and big statement for Kiran to make. She fears for her child. She fears about what the atmosphere around us will be. She feels scared to open the newspapers every day."
Khan claimed that his sense of insecurity has increased in the past few months and laid stress upon the people in power to strongly condemn such incidents.
Security outside his home has been ramped up since he made the above statements.
http://www.dawn.com/news/1222160
*******
Shiv Sena announces INR100,000 reward for 'slapping Aamir Khan'
LUDHIANA: In a troubling development, the Punjab chapter of Indian far-right political group Shiv Sena announced a cash reward of INR 100,000 for "anyone who slaps" Bollywood actor Aamir Khan over his recent remarks on 'intolerance' in India, said a report published on the Hindustan Times.
The bizarre announcement was made during a protest staged by Shiv Sena activists outside a hotel where Aamir Khan is staying for shooting his upcoming movie 'Dangal'.
Examine: Aamir Khan should go to Pakistan, says Shiv Sena leader
During the protest, Shiv Sena activists used derogatory language against the actor and burnt his photographs.
The report quoted Shiv Sena Punjab chairman Rajeev Tandon, who was leading the protesters, as saying: “Any person who slaps Aamir Khan would be rewarded Rs1 lakh (INR 100,000) by our organisation. This is important because no one living in our country should dare to say anything against India.”
“Anyone from the hotel staff to the crew can slap him and take the reward,” he was quoted as saying.
http://www.dawn.com/news/1222431/shiv-s ... aamir-khan
India's War On Biryani Mixes Caste, Religion, Cow-Avenging Vigilantes
A legendary South Asian dish has suddenly found itself in the midst of a war in India. Made up of layers of meat and rice and cooked with fragrant spices, the dish is the much-loved biryani. And the latest battlefield is in the northern Indian state of Haryana.
The police there have been collecting biryani samples from households and shops in Muslim districts like Mewat, to check if the meat in the biryani is beef – the consumption of which is anathema to many Hindus. It's the most recent chapter in an ongoing battle over religious and caste identities playing out through food in India, sometimes with dark consequences.
"The battle around food is not just about eating," says social scientist Shiv Viswanathan, professor at Jindal Global Law School in Haryana. "Food is essentially the grammar of society. You show hospitality through food. You can also insult someone through food."
That's why this biryani surveillance feels so loaded. Biryani, unlike other Indian favorites, has Muslim roots. It's a one-pot dish that is thought to have come to the subcontinent centuries ago via the Mughals (old Muslim rulers from Persia and Central Asia) who gave India the Taj Mahal and also rich Mughlai cuisine.
More...
http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/201 ... rm=nprnews
A legendary South Asian dish has suddenly found itself in the midst of a war in India. Made up of layers of meat and rice and cooked with fragrant spices, the dish is the much-loved biryani. And the latest battlefield is in the northern Indian state of Haryana.
The police there have been collecting biryani samples from households and shops in Muslim districts like Mewat, to check if the meat in the biryani is beef – the consumption of which is anathema to many Hindus. It's the most recent chapter in an ongoing battle over religious and caste identities playing out through food in India, sometimes with dark consequences.
"The battle around food is not just about eating," says social scientist Shiv Viswanathan, professor at Jindal Global Law School in Haryana. "Food is essentially the grammar of society. You show hospitality through food. You can also insult someone through food."
That's why this biryani surveillance feels so loaded. Biryani, unlike other Indian favorites, has Muslim roots. It's a one-pot dish that is thought to have come to the subcontinent centuries ago via the Mughals (old Muslim rulers from Persia and Central Asia) who gave India the Taj Mahal and also rich Mughlai cuisine.
More...
http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/201 ... rm=nprnews
In India, a Name Is Rarely Just a Name
Excerpt:
But if the British layer was but a topsoil, India’s Muslim past was another matter. India, like the Balkans, had several centuries of Islamic rule over a largely unconverted population. The Islamic conquest of the Indian mainland began in the 11th century and continued until the 18th. All across a state like Uttar Pradesh, the most populous in the country, there are cities, as Rebecca West would say, “of two natures.” The medieval Muslim town of Kannauj overlays the Hindu city of Kanyakubja, the fabled capital of the eighth-century king Yasovarman. Allahabad sits atop the Hindu city of Prayaaga, situated at the confluence of three sacred rivers. In some cases — such as in Varanasi, the spiritual capital of Hinduism — great mosques rise over the bones of old temples.
But the Muslim past, unlike the British, does have inheritors — the more than 170 million Indian Muslims. It is not so easy to erase their history, and historically India has not sought to do so. The Indian approach was always syncretic. Cities with multiple natures went by multiple names. Varanasi, for instance, was known and still is by its Muslim-era name Banaras to both Hindu and Muslim alike. But both communities, when they meant to evoke the name of the sacred city that underlay the physical one — the city of Hindu myth and pilgrimage — would automatically refer to it by its ancient Sanskrit name, Kashi.
That Indian sophistication is increasingly a thing of the past. Hindu nationalism is ascendant, and the political fortunes of a party like the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party, have been built on a weaponized idea of history. Narendra Modi, now the prime minister, helped organize the 1990 political and religious movement that led eventually to the destruction of a 16th-century mosque in Ayodhya, said to stand on the birthplace of the epic Hindu hero Ram. That event, which led to Hindu-Muslim riots in which 2,000 died, is seen by many Indian Muslims as the moment when India’s syncretic culture began to unravel.
Since Mr. Modi came to power three years ago, his government has played the name game cautiously. In 2015, Aurangzeb Road, an arterial street in British Delhi named for a reviled 17th-century Mughal emperor, was renamed Abdul Kalam Road, after a Muslim president of India in the early 2000s and a major figure in the country’s missile and nuclear programs. This was the B.J.P. replacing the name of a Muslim villain with a Muslim patriot.
But more and more the party’s view of India’s Muslim history is monolithic. In Goa last year, the B.J.P. president, Amit Shah, described the Muslim period as part of a thousand-year history of slavery. Some months before, a B.J.P. minister had demanded that even Akbar Road — named after the third of the Great Mughals, and the exemplar of religious syncretism — be renamed for the Hindu king he defeated in battle.
It was an example of how even the glories of the Muslim past in India could in the eyes of its Hindu majority come to seem like an unbroken record of defeat. More recently, Yogi Adityanath, the new chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, said, “Foreign dignitaries visiting the country used to be gifted replicas of the Taj Mahal and other minarets which do not reflect Indian culture.” If the Taj Mahal gets under your skin, safe to say probably everything will.
More..
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/26/opin ... &te=1&_r=0
Excerpt:
But if the British layer was but a topsoil, India’s Muslim past was another matter. India, like the Balkans, had several centuries of Islamic rule over a largely unconverted population. The Islamic conquest of the Indian mainland began in the 11th century and continued until the 18th. All across a state like Uttar Pradesh, the most populous in the country, there are cities, as Rebecca West would say, “of two natures.” The medieval Muslim town of Kannauj overlays the Hindu city of Kanyakubja, the fabled capital of the eighth-century king Yasovarman. Allahabad sits atop the Hindu city of Prayaaga, situated at the confluence of three sacred rivers. In some cases — such as in Varanasi, the spiritual capital of Hinduism — great mosques rise over the bones of old temples.
But the Muslim past, unlike the British, does have inheritors — the more than 170 million Indian Muslims. It is not so easy to erase their history, and historically India has not sought to do so. The Indian approach was always syncretic. Cities with multiple natures went by multiple names. Varanasi, for instance, was known and still is by its Muslim-era name Banaras to both Hindu and Muslim alike. But both communities, when they meant to evoke the name of the sacred city that underlay the physical one — the city of Hindu myth and pilgrimage — would automatically refer to it by its ancient Sanskrit name, Kashi.
That Indian sophistication is increasingly a thing of the past. Hindu nationalism is ascendant, and the political fortunes of a party like the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party, have been built on a weaponized idea of history. Narendra Modi, now the prime minister, helped organize the 1990 political and religious movement that led eventually to the destruction of a 16th-century mosque in Ayodhya, said to stand on the birthplace of the epic Hindu hero Ram. That event, which led to Hindu-Muslim riots in which 2,000 died, is seen by many Indian Muslims as the moment when India’s syncretic culture began to unravel.
Since Mr. Modi came to power three years ago, his government has played the name game cautiously. In 2015, Aurangzeb Road, an arterial street in British Delhi named for a reviled 17th-century Mughal emperor, was renamed Abdul Kalam Road, after a Muslim president of India in the early 2000s and a major figure in the country’s missile and nuclear programs. This was the B.J.P. replacing the name of a Muslim villain with a Muslim patriot.
But more and more the party’s view of India’s Muslim history is monolithic. In Goa last year, the B.J.P. president, Amit Shah, described the Muslim period as part of a thousand-year history of slavery. Some months before, a B.J.P. minister had demanded that even Akbar Road — named after the third of the Great Mughals, and the exemplar of religious syncretism — be renamed for the Hindu king he defeated in battle.
It was an example of how even the glories of the Muslim past in India could in the eyes of its Hindu majority come to seem like an unbroken record of defeat. More recently, Yogi Adityanath, the new chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, said, “Foreign dignitaries visiting the country used to be gifted replicas of the Taj Mahal and other minarets which do not reflect Indian culture.” If the Taj Mahal gets under your skin, safe to say probably everything will.
More..
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/26/opin ... &te=1&_r=0
India’s Muslims and the Price of Partition
Excerpt:
In 1937, Congress adopted as the national song of India some verses from “Vande Mataram,” or “I praise you, Mother,” a poem written in the 1870s by Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay, a Bengali poet and novelist, as an ode to the Hindu goddess Durga. The League objected to its singing as it depicted India as Mother Goddess, which the League construed to promote idolatry, anathema to Muslims.
Over the last three years, under Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party government, some of the League’s fears in the 1930s and ’40s have returned to haunt India’s Muslims — who acount for 172 million of India’s 1.3 billion citizens.
Punishment for cow slaughter, which is proscribed in most states of India, has become more severe. A conviction can lead to sentences ranging from five years to life imprisonment.
The foot soldiers of Mr. Modi’s party and its affiliates have run aggressive campaigns demanding that, apart from giving up beef, India’s Muslims must not date or marry Hindu girls or women. They should reconvert to Hinduism, the B.J.P. and like-minded others say, because their ancestors were Hindus who were forcibly converted by medieval Muslim rulers. They must sing “Vande Mataram,” the national song, these proponents say, to prove their loyalty to India, and their children must perform yoga in schools to show respect for India’s culture.
Since some medieval Muslim kings demolished temples to build mosques, the B.J.P. and affiliates say, Muslims in modern, democratic India should voluntarily hand over various mosques and shrines to the Hindus.
The most alarming trend has been the lynching of Muslims suspected of possessing beef, for ferrying home cattle purchased legitimately from cattle markets elsewhere.
The markers of Muslim identity — beards, skullcaps and head scarves — invite frowns, even violence, in India. On a late June afternoon, Junaid Khan, a 15-year-old Muslim boy, was stabbed to death on a train near New Delhi. Mr. Khan was traveling with his older brother and two friends. They were identified as Muslim because of their clothes and skullcaps. After an argument over a train seat, their fellow passengers threw religious slurs at them, killed Mr. Khan and injured the other boys.
Hindu nationalists haven’t forgiven Muslims for the partition of India, but their fury is a little misguided.
More...
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/17/opin ... dline&te=1
Excerpt:
In 1937, Congress adopted as the national song of India some verses from “Vande Mataram,” or “I praise you, Mother,” a poem written in the 1870s by Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay, a Bengali poet and novelist, as an ode to the Hindu goddess Durga. The League objected to its singing as it depicted India as Mother Goddess, which the League construed to promote idolatry, anathema to Muslims.
Over the last three years, under Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party government, some of the League’s fears in the 1930s and ’40s have returned to haunt India’s Muslims — who acount for 172 million of India’s 1.3 billion citizens.
Punishment for cow slaughter, which is proscribed in most states of India, has become more severe. A conviction can lead to sentences ranging from five years to life imprisonment.
The foot soldiers of Mr. Modi’s party and its affiliates have run aggressive campaigns demanding that, apart from giving up beef, India’s Muslims must not date or marry Hindu girls or women. They should reconvert to Hinduism, the B.J.P. and like-minded others say, because their ancestors were Hindus who were forcibly converted by medieval Muslim rulers. They must sing “Vande Mataram,” the national song, these proponents say, to prove their loyalty to India, and their children must perform yoga in schools to show respect for India’s culture.
Since some medieval Muslim kings demolished temples to build mosques, the B.J.P. and affiliates say, Muslims in modern, democratic India should voluntarily hand over various mosques and shrines to the Hindus.
The most alarming trend has been the lynching of Muslims suspected of possessing beef, for ferrying home cattle purchased legitimately from cattle markets elsewhere.
The markers of Muslim identity — beards, skullcaps and head scarves — invite frowns, even violence, in India. On a late June afternoon, Junaid Khan, a 15-year-old Muslim boy, was stabbed to death on a train near New Delhi. Mr. Khan was traveling with his older brother and two friends. They were identified as Muslim because of their clothes and skullcaps. After an argument over a train seat, their fellow passengers threw religious slurs at them, killed Mr. Khan and injured the other boys.
Hindu nationalists haven’t forgiven Muslims for the partition of India, but their fury is a little misguided.
More...
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/17/opin ... dline&te=1
Why is Modi so popular with the Indian Shia community?
Shia, khoja or Dawoodi Bohra (Vora in gujarati) are sects of Islam who are not fanatical. They follow their religious head as their Guru. They are peace loving muslims and are mild in nature. Khoja and Dawoodi Bohra are evident converts from hindus. In Gujarat it is believed that Thakkers or Lohanas had accepted islam under pressure from the ruling muslim kings. They were predominently business communities. Both Khojas and Dawoodi Bohra people speak Gujarati as their mother tongue.They still have photos of Ram and Krishna in their homes, signifying their conversion from hindu religion in the times of oppressive mughal kings like Aurangzeb. They used to celebrate Ied as well as Diwali. They stand distincly different from Sunni muslims.
These communities are mild in nature like hindus and are predominently businessmen or small traders. In the days of congress rule they used to pay protection money or commission to a muslim goon supported by congress rule. They paid this money unwillingly as there was no option for them except to submit to “DADAGIRI” of these goons. Frequent state sponsored riots in the rule of Madhavsing Solanki and Prabodh Raval( the then home minister ) in Ahmedabad and other cities disrupted their business. Those were the days of continuous curfew in Teen Darwaja and Relief road and Gandhi road, the main business centres of the city. The press of Gujarat Samachar was burnt down by Congress goons in Ahmedsbad causing loss of crores of rupees to owner of Gujarat Samachar. State govt of Gujarat didn’t worry to restore law & order situation. Businesses remained closed for months together. Shia, Vora and Khoja communities were the worst sufferers from these riots as there was closure of shops and trade for many days of the year.
This trend continued more or less in the rule of BJP while Keshubhai patel was CM. Even brother of CM was scared of opening his medical shop in Teen Darwaja area of Ahmedabad. Those days were characterised by having marked effect of scandalous and corrupt rule of Congress. There was no dearth of agents who claimed that they have influence over administration. If anybody wanted some permission or licence from govt, then they would be first asked to meet CM’s son or his son-in-law. If they can please this duo by greasing their palm, they may succeed to get permission. There was superabundance of agents who used to wander in and out of CM’S office who called themselves as special men of CM. They claimed that they can obtain CM’s signature within minutes on payment of hefty amount to them.
With the advent of Modi as CM of Gujarat all these stopped suddenly as Modi believed in the principle of “ KHATO NATHI, KHAVA DETO NATHI” (NEITHER I TAKE BRIBE, NOR I ALLOW YOU TO TAKE BRIBE.) This made a radical change in the whole scenario. All of a sudden the so called special agents of CM vanished in the air. Nobody could claim that he can obtain approval of CM for robust money. Decisions were taken on merits irrespective of the applicant being hindu, muslim,christian or Sikh or a dalit. Modi treated all sects equally and he never thought muslims to be unapproachable or taboo. After the Godhra riots in 2002, there was no incidence of violence in Gujarat. Law and order situation in Gujarat was perfectly alright. Police department was instructed to see that no businessmen should be harassed unnecessarily. All kinds of business prospered and the business communities were very happy with the government administration. There was no gangster in the state after the death of Abdul Latif. All supporters of gangsters and small goons who were collecting “HAPTAS” from shopkeepers and traders were arrested and put behind the bars. This had a profound impact on the day- to- day life of the citizens of Gujarat. Shia community being businessmen were too pleased with Modi government.
Shia muslims joined BJP in large numbers after “SADBHAVANA MISSIONS”of CM. Modi used to have regular meetings with these people in order to hear and solve their grievances. He had fruitful discussions with their religious heads like Syedna or prince Karim Agha Khan. As PM of India Modi has developed cordial relations with Shia government of Iran.
This is the major reason that Shia community in India and specially in Gujarat are staunch supporters of Modi. There may be some other reasons too.
Photos and more...
https://www.topbuzz.com/article/i646919 ... 1106&c=sys
Shia, khoja or Dawoodi Bohra (Vora in gujarati) are sects of Islam who are not fanatical. They follow their religious head as their Guru. They are peace loving muslims and are mild in nature. Khoja and Dawoodi Bohra are evident converts from hindus. In Gujarat it is believed that Thakkers or Lohanas had accepted islam under pressure from the ruling muslim kings. They were predominently business communities. Both Khojas and Dawoodi Bohra people speak Gujarati as their mother tongue.They still have photos of Ram and Krishna in their homes, signifying their conversion from hindu religion in the times of oppressive mughal kings like Aurangzeb. They used to celebrate Ied as well as Diwali. They stand distincly different from Sunni muslims.
These communities are mild in nature like hindus and are predominently businessmen or small traders. In the days of congress rule they used to pay protection money or commission to a muslim goon supported by congress rule. They paid this money unwillingly as there was no option for them except to submit to “DADAGIRI” of these goons. Frequent state sponsored riots in the rule of Madhavsing Solanki and Prabodh Raval( the then home minister ) in Ahmedabad and other cities disrupted their business. Those were the days of continuous curfew in Teen Darwaja and Relief road and Gandhi road, the main business centres of the city. The press of Gujarat Samachar was burnt down by Congress goons in Ahmedsbad causing loss of crores of rupees to owner of Gujarat Samachar. State govt of Gujarat didn’t worry to restore law & order situation. Businesses remained closed for months together. Shia, Vora and Khoja communities were the worst sufferers from these riots as there was closure of shops and trade for many days of the year.
This trend continued more or less in the rule of BJP while Keshubhai patel was CM. Even brother of CM was scared of opening his medical shop in Teen Darwaja area of Ahmedabad. Those days were characterised by having marked effect of scandalous and corrupt rule of Congress. There was no dearth of agents who claimed that they have influence over administration. If anybody wanted some permission or licence from govt, then they would be first asked to meet CM’s son or his son-in-law. If they can please this duo by greasing their palm, they may succeed to get permission. There was superabundance of agents who used to wander in and out of CM’S office who called themselves as special men of CM. They claimed that they can obtain CM’s signature within minutes on payment of hefty amount to them.
With the advent of Modi as CM of Gujarat all these stopped suddenly as Modi believed in the principle of “ KHATO NATHI, KHAVA DETO NATHI” (NEITHER I TAKE BRIBE, NOR I ALLOW YOU TO TAKE BRIBE.) This made a radical change in the whole scenario. All of a sudden the so called special agents of CM vanished in the air. Nobody could claim that he can obtain approval of CM for robust money. Decisions were taken on merits irrespective of the applicant being hindu, muslim,christian or Sikh or a dalit. Modi treated all sects equally and he never thought muslims to be unapproachable or taboo. After the Godhra riots in 2002, there was no incidence of violence in Gujarat. Law and order situation in Gujarat was perfectly alright. Police department was instructed to see that no businessmen should be harassed unnecessarily. All kinds of business prospered and the business communities were very happy with the government administration. There was no gangster in the state after the death of Abdul Latif. All supporters of gangsters and small goons who were collecting “HAPTAS” from shopkeepers and traders were arrested and put behind the bars. This had a profound impact on the day- to- day life of the citizens of Gujarat. Shia community being businessmen were too pleased with Modi government.
Shia muslims joined BJP in large numbers after “SADBHAVANA MISSIONS”of CM. Modi used to have regular meetings with these people in order to hear and solve their grievances. He had fruitful discussions with their religious heads like Syedna or prince Karim Agha Khan. As PM of India Modi has developed cordial relations with Shia government of Iran.
This is the major reason that Shia community in India and specially in Gujarat are staunch supporters of Modi. There may be some other reasons too.
Photos and more...
https://www.topbuzz.com/article/i646919 ... 1106&c=sys
Hate Smears India’s Symbol of Love, the Taj Mahal
Rabindranath Tagore, the Nobel Prize-winning Indian author, called the Taj Mahal “a teardrop on the cheek of time.” It is perhaps India’s greatest cultural treasure and its pre-eminent tourist attraction.
But the Hindu extremists who have become a driving force in India are so obsessed with demonizing Muslims that they are smearing it as an abomination.
Built in the 17th century by the Mughal emperor Shah Jahan as a tomb for his beloved wife, Mumtaz Mahal, the Taj Mahal is considered one of the wonders of the world and a magnificent symbol of enduring love. Millions flock to marvel at its shimmering magnificence, with intricately inlaid and carved white marble inscribed with verses from the Quran, every year. And that is exactly what the Hindu right finds so galling.
In October, it came to light that the state of Uttar Pradesh — where the Taj Mahal is located, in the city of Agra, and which is headed by the firebrand Hindu cleric Yogi Adityanath — had omitted the monument from its tourism brochure and cut its funding from the state’s tourism budget. Sangeet Som, a member of the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party, railed that the Taj Mahal was “a blot on Indian culture” built by “traitors.” And Mr. Som’s party colleague Vinay Katiyar blustered, completely unglued from historical fact, that the Taj Mahal was actually “Tejo Mahal, Lord Shiva’s temple,” referring to the Hindu god.
Perhaps sensing the damage such attacks could do to his state’s tourism revenue, Mr. Adityanath thought it well to visit the Taj Mahal to quell the fracas, although only grudgingly admitting the tomb was important because it “was built by the blood and sweat of Indian laborers.” The Taj Mahal has since been restored to Uttar Pradesh’s tourism brochure.
Anti-Muslim rhetoric and unprovoked physical attacks on Muslims have risen alarmingly under the government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Bharatiya Janata Party, and Hindu hard-liners speak more and more boldly of an India where Muslim citizens are, if not hated enemies, mere guests who live at the sufferance of Hindus.
Wednesday was the 25th anniversary of the demolition of the 16th century Babri Masjid mosque in Ayodhya by Hindu fanatics who claimed it was built on the site of a Hindu temple. Subsequent rioting between Hindus and Muslims, which killed more than 2,000 people by some estimates, is a reminder of what Hindu zealotry can wreak. Hard-liners vow still to rebuild a Hindu temple on the site of that ruined mosque, and India’s Supreme Court began hearings on the fate of the site last week.
In this disturbing context, preserving the Taj Mahal is important, not only as a testament to the glories of India’s syncretic past, but also as a pledge to an inclusive future.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/10/opin ... dline&te=1
Rabindranath Tagore, the Nobel Prize-winning Indian author, called the Taj Mahal “a teardrop on the cheek of time.” It is perhaps India’s greatest cultural treasure and its pre-eminent tourist attraction.
But the Hindu extremists who have become a driving force in India are so obsessed with demonizing Muslims that they are smearing it as an abomination.
Built in the 17th century by the Mughal emperor Shah Jahan as a tomb for his beloved wife, Mumtaz Mahal, the Taj Mahal is considered one of the wonders of the world and a magnificent symbol of enduring love. Millions flock to marvel at its shimmering magnificence, with intricately inlaid and carved white marble inscribed with verses from the Quran, every year. And that is exactly what the Hindu right finds so galling.
In October, it came to light that the state of Uttar Pradesh — where the Taj Mahal is located, in the city of Agra, and which is headed by the firebrand Hindu cleric Yogi Adityanath — had omitted the monument from its tourism brochure and cut its funding from the state’s tourism budget. Sangeet Som, a member of the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party, railed that the Taj Mahal was “a blot on Indian culture” built by “traitors.” And Mr. Som’s party colleague Vinay Katiyar blustered, completely unglued from historical fact, that the Taj Mahal was actually “Tejo Mahal, Lord Shiva’s temple,” referring to the Hindu god.
Perhaps sensing the damage such attacks could do to his state’s tourism revenue, Mr. Adityanath thought it well to visit the Taj Mahal to quell the fracas, although only grudgingly admitting the tomb was important because it “was built by the blood and sweat of Indian laborers.” The Taj Mahal has since been restored to Uttar Pradesh’s tourism brochure.
Anti-Muslim rhetoric and unprovoked physical attacks on Muslims have risen alarmingly under the government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Bharatiya Janata Party, and Hindu hard-liners speak more and more boldly of an India where Muslim citizens are, if not hated enemies, mere guests who live at the sufferance of Hindus.
Wednesday was the 25th anniversary of the demolition of the 16th century Babri Masjid mosque in Ayodhya by Hindu fanatics who claimed it was built on the site of a Hindu temple. Subsequent rioting between Hindus and Muslims, which killed more than 2,000 people by some estimates, is a reminder of what Hindu zealotry can wreak. Hard-liners vow still to rebuild a Hindu temple on the site of that ruined mosque, and India’s Supreme Court began hearings on the fate of the site last week.
In this disturbing context, preserving the Taj Mahal is important, not only as a testament to the glories of India’s syncretic past, but also as a pledge to an inclusive future.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/10/opin ... dline&te=1
“Cow vigilantism” in India
MANY stock images of India’s cities show cows lying by the roadside or ruminating in the middle of the street as cars and bikes swerve around them. The animals, sacred to Hindus, have a licence to roam. Earlier this month the state government of Uttar Pradesh proposed making medicines with their urine, which is rumoured to cure cancer, eliminate wrinkles and prevent ageing. Their dung is believed to absorb harmful radioactivity. The animals’ status is now so high that in recent years “cow vigilantes” have taken to attacking and sometimes killing people they suspect of trafficking in cattle intended for slaughter. Thirty-seven such attacks were reported in 2017, many more than in previous years. Just last month a mob in the eastern state of Bihar beat up a truck driver whom they suspected to be carrying beef.
More:
https://www.economist.com/blogs/economi ... lydispatch
MANY stock images of India’s cities show cows lying by the roadside or ruminating in the middle of the street as cars and bikes swerve around them. The animals, sacred to Hindus, have a licence to roam. Earlier this month the state government of Uttar Pradesh proposed making medicines with their urine, which is rumoured to cure cancer, eliminate wrinkles and prevent ageing. Their dung is believed to absorb harmful radioactivity. The animals’ status is now so high that in recent years “cow vigilantes” have taken to attacking and sometimes killing people they suspect of trafficking in cattle intended for slaughter. Thirty-seven such attacks were reported in 2017, many more than in previous years. Just last month a mob in the eastern state of Bihar beat up a truck driver whom they suspected to be carrying beef.
More:
https://www.economist.com/blogs/economi ... lydispatch
-
shivaathervedi_3
- Posts: 354
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2018 7:29 pm
In a shocking incident, a temple in Hamirpur district of Uttar Pradesh (UP) was purified with Gangajal on Monday after a woman Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MLA visited the temple to attend a function. The BJP woman MLA from Raath constituency, Manisha Anuragi had visited the Dhrum Rishi temple on July 12, 2018. Locals and the priest conducted a ceremony to purify the temple today and the statues of deities were sent to Allahabad to be purified. The temple is believed to be centuries old and women devotees are prohibited from entering its premises. (Hindustan Times Correspondent)
-
mazharshah_1
- Posts: 35
- Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2018 8:40 pm
Monday, Oct 15, 2018
Press Trust of India
Ismailis, Vohra, and Sindhis are not invited!!
Man refused entry to garba event in US, was told ‘you don’t look Hindu’
Karan Jani said that he had been attending the event at the venue for the last six years “to celebrate Indian culture” and the incident had left him shocked and embarrassed.
An expat scientist Karan Jani from Gujarat has tweeted that he and his friends were denied entry into a “garba” dance event in Atlanta in the US after organisers allegedly said that their last names and look weren’t “Hindu”.(Dr Karan Jani /Twitter)
An expat scientist from Gujarat has tweeted that he and his friends were denied entry into a “garba” dance event in Atlanta in the US after organisers allegedly said that their last names and look weren’t “Hindu”.
Karan Jani (29), hailing from Vadodara, is an astrophysicist in the Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory (LIGO), a large-scale physics experiment and observatory operated by Caltech and MIT to detect cosmic gravitational waves.
“Year 2018 and Shakti Mandir in Atlanta, USA denied me and my friends entry from playing garba because: ‘You don’t look Hindu and last name in your IDs dont sound Hindu,’“ Jani alleged in a tweet on October 12 after the incident.
He and his friends were denied entry on the ground that they were “ISMAILIS, VOHRA and SINDHIS”, Jani said.
Meanwhile, his father Pankaj Jani, who lives in Vadodara, told media persons that Karan spoke to him after the incident and sounded nervous.
“Volunteers stopped him and told him he does not look like a Hindu and even his surname does not appear to be that of a Hindu. They checked his ID which had the national emblem on it. Despite that, he was asked to leave. Later he talked to me over phone and sounded nervous,” Jani said.
“He has been going there since years for the event,” the victim’s father further said.
In his tweet, Karan Jani narrated a conversation between one of the organisers and his friend.
He said:”My Konkani friend who came to Garba for 1st time due to enthusiasm of us Gujaratis was pulled out of line and was told: ‘We don't come to your events, you are not allowed to ours’ She: ‘My last name is Murdeshwar. Im Kannada-Marathi!’ Him: ‘What is Kannada? You are Ismaili’.” “My other friends last name had ‘Dangarwala’. We spoke in Gujarati to them. They still said we were ‘Vohra, Sindhis’. They actually kept stating other religions!! They ganged up and told us to leave. While we saw other non-Indians being entered (which they of course should!),” he further tweeted.
“Our IDs had Indian Emblem. Yes emblem with ‘Satyamev Jayate’ right? Apparently, it didnt have our religion. Our caste. It was embarrassing. I had tears in my eyes saying them: I come here to play Garba for last 6 years. How could you not let us in because of last name’,” Jani mentioned on the microblogging site.
Jani said that he had been attending the event at the venue for the last six years “to celebrate Indian culture” and the incident had left him “shocked and embarrassed.
Press Trust of India
Ismailis, Vohra, and Sindhis are not invited!!
Man refused entry to garba event in US, was told ‘you don’t look Hindu’
Karan Jani said that he had been attending the event at the venue for the last six years “to celebrate Indian culture” and the incident had left him shocked and embarrassed.
An expat scientist Karan Jani from Gujarat has tweeted that he and his friends were denied entry into a “garba” dance event in Atlanta in the US after organisers allegedly said that their last names and look weren’t “Hindu”.(Dr Karan Jani /Twitter)
An expat scientist from Gujarat has tweeted that he and his friends were denied entry into a “garba” dance event in Atlanta in the US after organisers allegedly said that their last names and look weren’t “Hindu”.
Karan Jani (29), hailing from Vadodara, is an astrophysicist in the Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory (LIGO), a large-scale physics experiment and observatory operated by Caltech and MIT to detect cosmic gravitational waves.
“Year 2018 and Shakti Mandir in Atlanta, USA denied me and my friends entry from playing garba because: ‘You don’t look Hindu and last name in your IDs dont sound Hindu,’“ Jani alleged in a tweet on October 12 after the incident.
He and his friends were denied entry on the ground that they were “ISMAILIS, VOHRA and SINDHIS”, Jani said.
Meanwhile, his father Pankaj Jani, who lives in Vadodara, told media persons that Karan spoke to him after the incident and sounded nervous.
“Volunteers stopped him and told him he does not look like a Hindu and even his surname does not appear to be that of a Hindu. They checked his ID which had the national emblem on it. Despite that, he was asked to leave. Later he talked to me over phone and sounded nervous,” Jani said.
“He has been going there since years for the event,” the victim’s father further said.
In his tweet, Karan Jani narrated a conversation between one of the organisers and his friend.
He said:”My Konkani friend who came to Garba for 1st time due to enthusiasm of us Gujaratis was pulled out of line and was told: ‘We don't come to your events, you are not allowed to ours’ She: ‘My last name is Murdeshwar. Im Kannada-Marathi!’ Him: ‘What is Kannada? You are Ismaili’.” “My other friends last name had ‘Dangarwala’. We spoke in Gujarati to them. They still said we were ‘Vohra, Sindhis’. They actually kept stating other religions!! They ganged up and told us to leave. While we saw other non-Indians being entered (which they of course should!),” he further tweeted.
“Our IDs had Indian Emblem. Yes emblem with ‘Satyamev Jayate’ right? Apparently, it didnt have our religion. Our caste. It was embarrassing. I had tears in my eyes saying them: I come here to play Garba for last 6 years. How could you not let us in because of last name’,” Jani mentioned on the microblogging site.
Jani said that he had been attending the event at the venue for the last six years “to celebrate Indian culture” and the incident had left him “shocked and embarrassed.