Stop Vilifying Madrasas and Start Discussing the Real Problem This Institution Faces

January 17, 2018

The recent statement by Uttar Pradesh Waqf Board Chairman stating that madrasas are producing terrorist has expectedly created a huge controversy. Roundly condemned by one and all, including his own party-men like Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi, he later clarified that his remarks were targeted at ‘few’ madrasas which in the name of education promote enmity between groups and spread fanaticism. Whether the controversy will now die down after the clarification of the UP Waqf Chairman remains to be seen; what was very disconcerting was the reaction of many Muslim organizations and individuals on this issue.

The first salvo was fired by the Jamiat Ulema e Hind, which thinks of itself as the custodian of everything remotely Islamic in India. It filed a defamation suit against the person concerned for spoiling the reputation of Islam in India with an added intent of creating religious misunderstanding between Hindus and Muslims. There were other groups which went to Court charging the statement as a hate speech designed to create enmity between Hindus and Muslims. Why such a reaction? This is not for the first time that a person, Hindu or Muslim, has levelled such charges against madrasas. Hindu groups and their leaders like Shakshi Maharaj have been saying pretty much the same thing for decades now. No one thought of moving the Court against him. And certainly, this is not about Hindu groups alone. Not so much in the distant past, it was the Left Front government’s own Chief Minister in West Bengal who proclaimed publicly that madrasas produced terrorists. Not one Muslim organization thought it fit to go to Court against him or to charge him as promoting enmity between Hindus and Muslims. What is so different about Waseem Rizwi?

Part of the reason why there is such a vehemence against him is because he is a Shia. Social media platforms like twitter and Facebook are littered with voices pointing out that his statements against madrasas are only because he is a Shia. As a Shia, he is deemed to be less of a Muslim and more of an enemy of Islam. He is doing the work of the devil in trying to defame Islam. Posts on these platforms have delved into Sunni theology to support their arguments and all of them share the consensus that Shias must be considered beyond the pale of Islam.

One can only wonder where this amount of hate is coming from and how much our own Islamic theology is responsible for this. Rather than debating on the merits of the argument, it is very convenient to call out the minority identity of the person to proclaim that his arguments have no merit at all. This is the kind of laziness which has characterised many a so called Islamic scholarship. In reality this strategy tells us about the hollowness of the Sunni argument itself.

There cannot be any debate that much needs to be changed about the present state of madrasa education. But the allegation that madrasas produce terrorists is quite baseless and bogus and is borne out of sheer ignorance of this institution. Despite historic suspicion about madrasas, there has been very little on the table to show that madrasas teach or promote terrorism.

During the time when Advani was the home minister, he instituted a special inquiry into the linkages of madrasa education with extremism and terrorism. Despite the best efforts of the state, they could not come up with anything concrete and thus the inquiry was buried quietly. Hindu nationalism has always been suspicious of madrasas and such thinking about madrasas have informed their public discourse for long.

History of these institutions points to something quite the opposite. If nationalism is the benchmark against which any individual or institution has to be judged today, then there cannot be any debate that madrasas were nationalist. They participated in the national movement and were at the fore-front of struggle against the British rule, giving a call for total freedom even as most radical organizations were still toying with the idea of ‘home rule’.

Madrasas today are synonymous with conservatism and its outmoded ideology. What happens in these institutions in the name of learning is nothing but rote memorization of certain texts which have lost all relevance in the present time. In order that they remain relevant, radical changes are certainly required in the pedagogical structure of these institutions. They have to introduce modern texts and even interpret the old ones in new light.

Those who speak of reforming the system are very conveniently dubbed as opposed to Muslims and Islam. There are people within the Muslim community who have vested interests in linking madrasas with Muslim identity. Thus, any criticism of madrasa is automatically read as an attack on Muslim identity and cries of Islam in danger start doing the rounds in Muslim circles. This has to stop.

It is not that Muslims themselves are too happy with the institution. Time and again, there have been Muslims who have voiced the need to reform the system. These Muslims have been both liberals as well as those who have come out of the madrasa system themselves. Yet there concerns have been not been paid attention to. Orthodoxies within the Muslims have been successfully able to put pressure on various governments to keep the system as it is. Various governments have conceded to their demands in the fallacious belief that these good for nothing Ulema are the true representative of Indian Muslims.

There is a need to debate about the present relevance of madrasa education for Muslims in India. Part of the problem is that the social class of Muslims who access madrasa education. They come from the poorest of the poor Muslim families who come to these madrasas in the hope of some education and assured meals. Elite Muslims have never considered this section as Muslim enough and therefore have never paid attention to the problems faced by this section.

Added to this is also the fact that it is primarily low caste Muslims who acquire madrasa education. The dominant narrative of Indian Muslim politics which has been decidedly upper caste, has never paid attention to the requirements of the majority of low caste Indian Muslims. There is a need to have a dispassionate debate on madrasa education. Instead what we get is a polarised debate between a section who think that everything is wrong about madrasas and a section of Muslims who think that madrasas need to be defended at all costs. The tragedy is that no one is thinking about the Lakhs of Muslim children who are studying in these madrasas.

Arshad Alam is a NewAgeIslam.com columnist

Courtesy: New Age Islam

Judiciary has to Stand Up and Protect it’s Independence: Indira Jaising

January 17, 2018

Indira Jaising at the All India People’s Forum Press Meet, talked about the urgency of the probe on Justice Loya’s death. Judge Loya was hearing the politically sensitive Sohrabuddin Sheikh police encounter case in which BJP President Amit Shah was one of the accused.

Courtesy: Newsclick.in

Muslim councillor from Meerut hands over cow to Police, says “it is a dangerous animal”

January 17, 2018

Fed up by the constant attacks on Muslims across the country in the name of so-called cow protection, a Muslim from Meerut-Abdul Gaffar Khan-handed over his cow to the local police station.

In an exclusive conversation with TwoCircles.net, Khan said, “I felt horrible doing this…this cow came to me as a calf and I have reared it since to the present time where it a fully grown cow. It is very dear to me, but given the present circumstances where Muslims are attacked on such a consistent basis, I believe that it is a dangerous animal for a Muslim to keep. I am scared and hence decided to hand over the cow.”

Confirming the decision of Khan, Nechandi Police Station-in charge Sanjay Kumar said that two people who had bought cows were harassed and beaten by members of right-wing Hindu organisations. Even the people who sold the cow were harassed by the same people, following which Khan, who is the local councillor, decided to take the step.

According to Azeez, one of the buyers, “we bought two cows from Mannu Singh and asked him to drop the cows at the dairy since it was dangerous for us to transport them. However, members of the Bajrang Dal attacked us regardless and we were taken to the local police station. The attackers were led by BJP councillor Rohit Rohilla. The police failed to take action despite the fact that we had a receipt of the payment of Rs 34,000 signed by both parties. One of the cows was eight months pregnant while the other was five months pregnant. Both the cows were confiscated from us.”

It was this incident that led to Khan submitting his cow to the police station as a form of protest.

Khan further added, “The cow is now too dangerous an animal for Muslims….everywhere in the country, Muslims are attacked by so-called Gau Rakshaks and the police and administration side with the attackers. I request the police to take the cow and hand it over to the Gau Rakshaks.”

Courtesy: Two Circles

The Myth of the Haj Subsidy

January 16, 2018

First Published on: January 20, 2017

In our national capital, corridors of power, are nowadays echoing, once again with an unending discussion, regarding Haj Subsidy. Few people know what exactly Haj Subsidy is; or what are its pros and cons? But, every Tom, Dick and Harry, without comprehending the whole issue is seen and heard, busy in offering variant opinions. Various TV channels are always there to pick up non-issues, particularly related to Muslims. Even our sober and sincere English Press has joined the debate, again without any fundamental knowledge of the issue or having made any effort to know the background of the problem. In fact, the so-called Haj Subsidy is a non-issue—a problem, created out of nothing.

First of all, let’s endeavour to realise, what Haj Subsidy is; in the common sense of the very word, a subsidy is a fiscal aid or at best a compensatory amount to make some fee or price, affordable, for the consumers. In this case, the Government of India subsidises the price of the air ticket for Haj pilgrims, taking a flight to Saudi Arabia, by Air India. A petty amount of Rs. Ten thousand or so, is sanctioned by the government for every pilgrim, flying for Haj. But, in practice, this amount is not directly paid to the travellers, but transferred to Air India. Truly speaking, this monetary assistance is meant at reducing the burden of Air India and not of the pilgrims, which is commonly believed.

This system was first adopted by former Prime Minister Mrs. Indira Gandhi to encourage Haj pilgrims to travel by air, abandoning the popular practice of journeying by sea route. The government, rightly felt, the air travel was safer and faster in comparison to sea journey. Ultimately, in 1995, the option of a ship journey was dropped altogether. So, all pilgrims began to take a flight to the holy shrines. In those days, there was a difference of ten or twelve thousand rupees, between the prices of the ticket of a ship and a plane. Hence, a provision of the same amount of compensation for the pilgrims, was made, in order to encourage them.

One thing to be noted is that Air India is the only option for the Haj pilgrims, to take a flight to Saudi Arabia, for performing the annual pilgrimage, through various Haj Committees. It should, once again be stressed that such a monetary help, doled out by the government goes to the coffers of the official air carrier and not to the pockets of the pilgrims, as the popular impression may be. The BJP Government, led by Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee had limited the provision of Haj subsidy to poor pilgrims only. But, once Congress returned to power in 2004, the new government lifted the restriction, and subsidy, as earlier, was made equally available to all pilgrims.

Today, as a fashion, every body is opposing the so-called Haj subsidy, in his or her chosen way, and again without knowing or trying to know the basic facts. On one hand, the so-called liberal groups view that a secular government can not provide financial assistance to a particular religious practice and on the other, the rightist (read fascist) groups loudly protest that such schemes are aimed at appeasing minorities (read Muslims). As far as BJP is concerned, it has always been staunchly opposed to the subsidy, though, it would readily demand and support all sorts of facilities, to be bestowed upon to Hindu, Buddhist, Jain and even Sikh pilgrims, at the expense of the exchequer. For instance, the government is spending crores of rupees, for facilitating various religious rites, like yatras, fairs and festivals. Here one can put up the pointed question; whether Muslims have no right on the treasury for taking any benefit.?

But, this is not the real issue. The truth is that Muslims have never asked for any sort of subsidy, for their annual pilgrimage of holy shrines and nor any Muslim leader did ever raise a demand, in this regard. On the other side, various Muslim leaders have regularly been opposing it. For instance, Syed Shahabuddin, the veteran politician, always spoke against Haj subsidy, inside and outside Parliament. Presently, Member of Parliament, Asaduddin Owaisi is openly opposed to the continuance of Haj subsidy. Further, We do not think, any of the Muslim leader—across party lines—or any eminent Islamic cleric would prefer to lend support to the so-called Haj subsidy.

Ironically, common Muslims and even the annual Haj pilgrims themselves are not well aware of the existence of any subsidy, for their pilgrimage. Moreover, a paltry sum—in the name of subsidy—does not mean much for any one, who takes up the holy journey, spending around one-two lakh rupees. Let’s remember, Haj is a sort of worship, compulsory for only those Muslims, who can afford it—wealthwise and healthwise—and that too once, in a life time only. Needless to say that a person, being capable of taking up such an expensive tour, would hardly mind to secure or save a little amount, in question.

In our view, the so-called Haj subsidy is a pretention, in disguise, to support Air India, to compensate its (non-existing) loss. The fact is that Air India charges a higher price from Haj pilgrims, in comparison to normal passengers. In our view, the best solution is that the government should float global tenders, for all flights of the Haj pilgrims. In that case a price competition would automatically reduce the fair and the pilgrims would also have a varied choice to select their flier. Resultantly, the new system would end the monopoly of Air India and the tickets may be available, at a lower price and then no subsidy would at all, be required. Thus, the curse of subsidy would eliminate in one go, freeing Muslims of a psychological pressure and then the opposing slogan mongers would also virtually be silenced.

This year the Saudi Government has resumed the previous quota of Indian Haj pilgrims to the earlier number of 1,70,000 pilgrims, as the holy shrine of Kaabah has been expanded suitably, to absorb a higher number of pilgrims. Notably, the Saudi Government had reduced the quota of all pilgrims, from the world over, including Indians, due to the construction and expansion work, being carried out in Mecca. Now, the operation has been accomplished, hence the restoration of the usual number of pilgrims. There is a rumour in the air now, that the government would have to spend an amount of Rs. 35,000/- per pilgrim, as the number of pilgrims have grown this year, so the treasury would have to bear a huge burden to the tune of Rs 500 crore. We do not know what the real statistics are. Meanwhile, the Government has declared that, this year, there would be no cut in Haj subsidy.

In view of a five year old Supreme Court judgement, the Government of India has constituted a Committee to look into the matter of Haj subsidy. The Apex Court in 2012, in its judgement, had verdicted that the Haj subsidy, should gradually be put to an end, within ten years. Most probably, the appointed committee would recommend an immediate curtailment of the practice. And all Muslims would certainly welcome it, as they, en masse have never been in favour of any of such pitiful schemes. As per Islamic tenets, a Muslim—who can afford it—has to bear all the expenses of Haj, from his or her own pocket. Neither government nor any other agency should share the expenses. Obviously, any Muslim, who is unable to bear the expenses, is not bound to perform Haj.

Before concluding this discussion, I would like to take liberty to recall a painful, but significant episode, when I had the privilege to remove the lid from the pandora’s box. There was a syndicated embezzlement, in the huge amounts of Haj subsidy, which brought the booty to mischievous players, on one hand and deprived the genuine receivers of their share, on the other: This game was played, with a nexus between Central Haj Committee functionaries and private tour operators. For the dubious exercise, they had invented a unique method. It was not commonly known that many of the pilgrims, going for the holy pilgrimage, who preferred to go through private operators, were provided seats in Air India planes and the amount of subsidy was also claimed, against their tickets. Eventually, this money was usurped by racketeers, never to reach the deserving passengers.

I had the honour of unveiling an evil conspiracy and exposing the real culprits. Actually, during my stint at Doordarshan, in 1997, I was deputed on the Haj duty, as a Haj officer. When, I reached Jeddah and performed at the Indian consulate there, then through my work, while perusing the correspondence, between the Indian External Affairs Ministry and the Indian Consulate at Jeddah and between them and the Central Haj Committee, I was shocked to learn about the above-said highly placed embezzlement. I, very promptly prepared a report, revealing the whole dubious conspiracy and presented it to the counsel for Haj, Mr. Zikrur Rahman, who advised me to take the report back, as he feared for my well-being and even life. He told me in so many words that all the players, in the game were very powerful and sourceful, they could harm me to any extent. But, I remained adamant and approached the Counsel General, Mr. Afzal Amanullah, he appreciated my crusade, against the sinful act and assured me of all support and backing from his end. However, I preferred to hold the report, for the time being and decided to bring it to light in India, after my return only.

Later, during my stay there, I experienced another nightmare, which still haunts me. The pilgrimage of Haj had begun and unfortunately, the same year, there was a dreadful fire in Mina, in which more than 500 Haj pilgrims, including a great number from India, were burnt to death. I witnessed that none from among the Haj Committee officials and members of the good-will delegation from India, bothered about either the victims or their relatives, back home, who kept desperately inquiring about the dead pilgrims. And no body was even caring for those injured, in the accident. In those days, communication was not as easy, as it is today—the cell phones were yet to come on scene. So, everybody was in distress. But, no noble soul came forward to offer any help of any sort, to them. This apathetic attitude astonished me a lot. I could not sit idle and wrote a lengthy article on the whole event and despatched it to daily, Inquilab, Mumbai—where I had regularly been writing a column, since 1990. Late Mr. Haroon Rashed, the (then) editor, chose to publish that write-up, as a front-page story, in two instalments. It created a storm. Naturally, I had stirred up the hornet’s nest.

The Haj Committee promptly raised the demand, before the Indian Ministry of External Affairs, to immediately call me back. Within three days, orders were issued and my deputation was cut short, under the immense pressure of Haj Committee of India. As a result, I had to take a flight back to New Delhi. The Haj Committee people did not stop there, they managed to pressurise Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, to take stern action, against me. Their charge was that being a government functionary, I had violated rules by reporting a matter to a private newspaper. Evidently, it was a ploy to nail me down, as I had unveiled their misdeeds. Nevertheless, the top officials at Doordarshan, chose not to take action against me. In stead they thumped at my back, for a brave act and adored me a lot. On their advice, I submitted a note, in my defence that, in fact, I had written a letter to one of my friends, in India, which somehow reached the newspaper and got published. They, of course counselled me to be cautious enough, in future.

Now, I could not write anything in this regard. But, with the help of some of my journalist friends, I managed to get various reports, exposing the above mentioned embezzlement by Haj Committee functionaries, published in English and Hindi newspapers, with different by-lines. With the publication of the reports, in various Delhi papers, the Ministry of External Affairs got moved and took effective steps to check the corrupt practices, but no action was taken against any one, responsible for it.

I am pleased of being the first one to raise voice, against an ongoing malpractice and exposing a high profile racket. I am proud of pelting the first stone, at the Satan.

[Translated from Urdu by Muzaffar Husain Syed]

Dr. Muzaffar Husain Syed
E-mail: syedmh92@yahoo.com • syedmh92@gmail.com

“Death is for the unmoving…”: K Neela on Lingayata Dharma and Vachana Sahitya

January 16, 2018

The Lingayat community in Karnataka has been struggling for about 40 years to get state recognition as separate from the Hindus. The movement is fast gaining momentum now. M M Kalburgi, who worked extensively on Vachana Sahitya, and Gauri Lankesh, who was a popular supporter of the movement, were both assassinated. Against this backdrop, the writer speaks to K Neela about the Lingayata Dharma and Vachana Sahitya. The article also throws light on how the Lingayata Dharma, which stood against the caste system, came to become a caste itself?

Image Courtesy: The Hindu

“Lingayat is not caste, but a tatva,” said K Neela. She is the Karnataka State Secretary of the All India Democratic Women’s Association (AIDWA), a vocal feminist, activist, and a writer who draws her inspiration from both the Vachana literature of 12th century Karnataka and the leftist ideology. Quoting a few Vachanas, she spoke to this writer about the Lingayata Chaluvali (Lingayat Movement) in Karnataka, explaining its meaning and the ideology of the movement. She also spoke about how the Lingayata Dharma became Lingayata Jati (Caste).

The Lingayat Movement contends that the Lingayat community is not a part of Hinduism. According to Neela, it is very important to note that Hinduism has been successful in co-opting its critics. For example, Buddhism and Buddha are now claimed to be very much a part of Hinduism. The Vachanas, which are the backbone of the Lingayat belief system, were written to critique the oppressive social order that was, and still is, governed by Hinduism. As will be explained in this article, Vachanas also gave an alternative belief system which did not have some of the discriminatory practices, like prohibitions based on imagined “pollution,” that Hinduism imposed on its followers.

Explaining further, Neela says, “The Vachanakaras tell us that the whole world is a Linga. Those who take care of this Linga are called Lingayata.” She also clarifies, “‘Linga’, here, is not the same ‘Shiva Linga’ that is worshiped in Hinduism as another form of Shiva. ‘Linga’, for the Vachanakaras, is a small oval structure that represents the world and its composition. The world is nothing but our physical form, our bodies. Hence, those who take care of this whole world, i.e., of their own bodies, are Lingayats.” According to Neela, this is the essence of the Lingayat Philosophy. Thus, the philosophy does away with gods, temples, and the clergy.

The Vachanas preach that the world is formed by one’s body, hence, this body has to be worshiped. The Vachanakaras, the writers of the Vachanas, explain that it is only through Kayaka (work) that you can worship this body. When one puts the body to work, one legitimises its existence by giving it a purpose in life. Hence, Neela says, “The Vachanakaras say, ‘Kayakave pooje; nin kayadinda shristi yagide; ninna kayave devare, kayakave pooje.’ (Work is worship; the origin of the universe is by your body; your body is the only god, and the work you do is the offering you make to your body.)”

The essence of the Lingayata Dharma lies in this philosophy, propounded by Vachanakaras like Basavanna, Allama Prabhu, Akka Mahadevi, and Madivala Machideva. According to them, god and religion were created to exploit people by instilling an irrational fear in them. The paraphernalia of temples, priests, hymns — and the concepts of purity and pollutions that they prescribed — were seen as a means of exploiting the people. It was only the brahmins and the ruling castes who had the authority to govern this paraphernalia and draft the norms. The Vachanas challenged this authority, urging the masses to find the god within themselves.

ಉಳ್ಳವರು ಶಿವಾಲಯ ಮಾಡುವರು ನಾನೇನ ಮಾಡಲಿ ಬಡವನಯ್ಯ,
ಎನ್ನ ಕಾಲೇ ಕಂಬ ದೇಹವೇ ದೇಗುಲ ಶಿರವೇ ಹೊನ್ನ ಕಳಶವಯ್ಯ,
ಕೂಡಲಸಂಗಮದೇವ ಕೇಳಯ್ಯ ಸ್ಥಾವರಕ್ಕಳಿವುಂಟು ಜನ್ಗಮಕಲಿವಿಲ್ಲ

ullavaru shivalaya maaduvaru naanena maadali badavanayya,
enna kaale kamba dehave degula shirave honna kalashavayya
Koodala Sangama Deva kelayya sthavarakkalivuntu jangamakalivilla
-Basavanna

The rich can build a temple and worship in it.
What should a poor man like me do?
My feet are the pillars of the temple, my body is the temple,
and my head is the golden urn on the temple.
Oh my Koodala Sangama Deva, listen to me:
death is for the unmoving, and not for those who move.

This, for instance, is a famous Vachana by Basavanna, a philosopher, social reformer, and a preacher of 12th century. Basavanna was also a statesman in the court of King Bijjala the II (1130–1167 CE) of the Kalachuri dynasty. Basavanna critiqued and opposed the dominant brahmanical social order, caste system, and its oppressive vedic traditions. Speaking against the vedic rituals and brahminism, he took up the cause of the oppressed castes.

The importance given to the Kaya (body) and Kayaka (work) in Vachanas shows how the Vachanakaras were critical of the caste system and the hierarchical system that it imposed on the people. It was a call to work, to take care of the body, to maintain sanity; and not to please some god or any other person.

K Neela, while explaining this, draws an analogy between Marxism and the Vachana Sahitya. She says, “The importance given to work in the Vachana Sahitya comes very close to Marxism. Marx also said, ‘Workers of the world unite.’” The language of Marxism, of the importance given to the ‘worker’, also questions the exploitative system of production. The concept of alienation, for example, makes the ‘worker’ and their relationship with the processes of production as the focal point of analysis of exploitation. The contexts and concerns, for Karl Marx and the Vachanakaras, were quite different. In fact, they still are. While the former was writing in an industrial class society, the latter were writing in the medieval caste society.

The Vachanakaras were addressing a society where exploitation of the castes was given legitimacy using the idea of Karma. The Vachanas adopt a simple language, challenging the grammatical orthodoxy of Sanskrit. Using the language of the exploited, they deconstruct the reasons for exploitation, thereby successfully uniting the oppressed against the oppressor. This is the reason for the success of the Vachanas, according to Neela. The importance given to the Kaya and the Kayaka in the Lingayata Dharma gives importance to the physicality of the human existence.

The call, thus, was to be conscious about this physical existence. They also urged the masses to challenge and fight the forces that exploit the physical body and legitimise this exploitation by claiming that is it either by divine ordinance or the punishment for past misdeeds. “The Vachanas tell us that, for the Vachanakaras and the Lingayata Dharma, it was labour, production, and participation that were of utmost importance,” says K Neela.

Ironically, the philosophy that stood against the Jati system (caste system) is, now, considered a Jati (Caste) itself. The Lingayats make up 17% of the population of Karnataka. Lingayat has also been given an “Other Backward Caste” (OBC) status. The reason for this lies in a period of crisis in the history of the Lingayat Movement.

K Neela narrates:
It was difficult to put the theory into practice. Basavanna and other Vachanakaras decided to bring theory into practice. Basavanna celebrated the marriage of Sheelavanta, son of Samagar Haralayya (a cobbler), to Kalavati, the daughter of Madhuvaras (a brahmin). Both Haralayya and Madhuvaras belonged to the Sharana community. An inter-caste marriage between a brahmin girl and cobbler boy was brought to the notice of Bijjala the II. Basavanna, at that point, was his minister. When the king questioned him for supporting the marriage, he resigned from his position and left Basavakalyana, leaving his family behind.

Meanwhile, Haralayya and Madhuvaras were brutally executed. All the Sharanas and the followers of the Vachanakaras, including the Vachanakaras themselves, were attacked. Amidst all the chaos, King Bijjala the II was murdered and the Sharanas were, falsely, accused of the murder. The Vachanakaras had to go underground, and all of their scholarly works were destroyed.

The Vachana movement (which opposed Brahmanism), as a result, suffered unimaginable setbacks. There were many among the followers of the Vachanakaras who were ritualistic. They followed certain rituals of their own, like worshipping the Linga, which led to the powerful Brahmanical system categorising Lingayata as a Jati.”

The Lingayat Movement, today, is trying to reclaim this egalitarian legacy by revisiting its history through the vast Vachana literature.

K Neela is the Karnataka State Secretary of the All India Democratic Women’s Association (AIDWA), a vocal feminist, activist, and a writer.

Yogesh S is a member of the editorial collective of the Indian Writers’ Forum.

Courtesy: Indian Cultural Forum

Protest Against Israeli PM Netanyahu’s India Visit Held in Delhi

January 16, 2018

Protest March against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s India visit was organised in Delhi by the Left Parties.

Protest March against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s India visit was organised in Delhi by the Left Parties. The March took place in the larger context of atrocities committed by Israeli government in Palestine and illegal occupation.

Courtesy: Newsclick.in

Bangladesh: Why are madrasas mushrooming?

January 16, 2018

The traditional Islamic schools known as madrasas have been in the spotlight in recent times with supporters defending them as essential seats of Islamic knowledge and critics denouncing them as hotbeds of extremist ideology. Established to disseminate Islamic knowledge, Bangladesh’s madrasas represent a diverse array of ideological orientations and ways of operating. This is the first of a six-part series in which the Dhaka Tribune takes an in-depth look inside Bangladesh’s madrasa education systemA total of 68 madrasas dot the eight kilometre stretch of highway going from Jatrabari to Kachpur.

There are 66 Qawmi madrasas, privately owned, while only 2 Alia madrasa exist that are government affiliated.

These privately owned Qawmi madrasas do not receive financial assistance from the government and are only able to operate with the aid of contributions and donations made by the locals or patrons.

There are however some exceptions such as madrasas that run an orphanage and are given financial aid strictly for the use of the orphanage. The madrasas that incorporate orphanages are sometimes given financial aid, following background checks and screening by government officials. It should be pointed out that some institutions exploit this loophole.

Dhaka Tribune has found there are 47 schools and colleges that enjoy government support and are situated in the vicinity of the same eight kilometer highway.

Forming an Alia madrasa requires government permission. Until 1970, there were an estimated 2,721 Alia madrasas in the country, as per Prof Abul Barkat, author of Political Economy of Madrasa Education in Bangladesh published in 2011.

In 2008, the total number of Alia madrasas stood at 14,152.

Bangladesh Bureau of Educational Information and Statistics (BANBEIS), however, says that as of 2015 total of 9,319 Alia madrasas were operating in the country. Of them three are government and others are non-government. The number of total students are 2,409,373.

Islamic school students sit in a classroom on the outskirts of Dhaka RAJIB DHAR

Prof Abul Barkat’s research says, number of students in Alia mardasas until 2008 was 4,580,082. He said that the number of Qawmi madrasas was 39,612 that year where 5,247,660 students studied at different classes.

BANBEIS keeps no data of the students and number of madrasa of Qawmi stream.

Prof Barakat’s research indicates that between 1950-2008 the number of madrasas increased rapidly—from 4,430 to 54,130. This includes both Qawmi and Alia madrasas. The Qawmi ones increased 13 times and Alia 11 times in the 60 years span.

Between 1991-2000 the growth rate was highest when 15,000 new madrasas were added across the country.

Discussions with researchers, politicians and teachers points to religion being politicized and belief systems becoming entrenched, bolstering the grown rate of madrasa in Bangladesh.

The government’s negligence to introduce proper education guidelines has also had an impact.

Mawlana Rafiqul Alam, Principle of Monshipara Hafijiya Madrasa and Orphanage in Gazipur said to Dhaka Tribune: “The objectives of Qawmi madrasa education and general education system are totally different. People who want to pursue religious work opt for madrasa”.

Qawmi madrasas are operating under more than a dozen education boards. A handful of Qawmi madrasas are not under any board. Then there are Maktabs, which are often attached to a mosque. This primary type of institutions are being established to tutor children in reading, writing, grammar and Islamic studies such as Qira’at (Quranic recitation) at rural and town areas.

Befaqul Madarisil Arabia Bangladesh (Befaq) or Bangladesh Qawmi madrasa education board is the most popular regulatory board of Qawmi madrasas. Under Befaq there are approximately, 5,451 madrasa as per their website.

“A vast number of people in our society want to build madrasa because of their personal religious beliefs,” added Rafiqul.

Befaqul Madarisil Arabia Bangladesh (Befaq), aims to encourage dignitaries to form more madrasas in their communities. They aim to promote Islam and claims that as a result, almost all villages in the country have a madrasa.

Explaining why madrasas are popular, Rafiqul said: “Madrasa education is significantly cheaper than general education. In addition, they also offer residential facilities which otherwise are not available in normal schools at cheap cost,” he added.

The interesting fact of Qawmi madrasa is, they reject state funding and instead rely on donations from the public to run their activities.

Funding and management of Qawmi madrasas

Every Qawmi madrasas has a managing committee named Majlis-ash-Shura consisting of the head of madrasa, its teachers and locally respected people and an executive committee with key members. The committee chief and Mohtamim (principal of the madrasa) are the key persons to take care of the madrasa fund.

The financial source of a Qawmi madrasa can be divided in two categories—internal and foreign sources, according to the book by Professor Barkat.

Affluent people donate money to the fund as Zakat (a form of alms-giving treated in Islam as a religious obligation or tax), Fitra (religious tax paid on the day when Muslims break the fasting period at the end of the month of Ramadan) and Sadaqa (voluntary charity).

Besides, earning from waqf properties (donated assets), cultivating crops in rural areas, fees given by the students are also sources of income. People also donate skins of sacrificial animals to these madrasas.

Students, teachers, staff members also collect donations from the houses, sometimes railway and bus stations and give receipts to the donors. In the past, people also used to donate paddy to these madrasa and their orphanage, who now donate money generally.

The foreign funds are mainly collected from the expatriate Bangladeshis in Middle East and European countries. Some foreign organizations also donate money but these donations normally are kept secret.

Prof Barakat said most madrasa authorities are reluctant to open their mouths about the source of funding.

The Qawmi madrasa collects money for several funds—general fund, lillah (for poor students) fund, fund to buy books, fund for infrastructure construction. A standard Qawmi madrasa spends Tk25 lakhs in a year on average.

The financial structure of Alia madrasa

The financial structure of Alia madrasa is regulated by management committees consisting of Upazila Nirbahi officer (UNO), who plays the role of president, backed up by an education officer, madrasa principal, teachers, guardians and locally influential people.

The whole financial system is being monitored by the Education Ministry, education board and madrasa board. The executive committee approve expenses and local education regulatory office of the government. All transactions are operated by a bank.

An Alia madrasa gets funds from the government’s revenue and development budget. They also may get personal donations. Teachers, committee members and students help to collect these personal donations.

This article was first published on Dhaka Tribune

Does the BJP intend to change the Indian Constitution?

January 16, 2018

BJP, which believes in Hindu nationalism, faces a dilemma about Indian Constitution. The party, at least on the surface, has to pay its obeisance to Indian Constitution for the electoral purpose to be sure. It has to seek votes of all sections of society including Dalits and other marginalized sections of society for whom this Constitution is a liberator. At present, BJP’s electoral strength is not adequate for changing the Constitution, so it cannot talk openly about the same. In addition, Constitution has also emotive values for large sections of Dalits, who regard it as the greatest contribution of Babasaheb Ambedkar in the direction of social change. In this light, the statement of Anantkumar Hegde, the Union Minister, that BJP is in power to change the Constitution may not have matched with the overall strategy of BJP, which is to get 2/3 majority first before talking on this. Hegde, while speaking in the meeting of Brahman Yuva Parishat said “I will be happy if someone identifies as Muslim, Christian, Brahmin, Lingayat or Hindu. But trouble will arise if they say they are secular.” And also that BJP is there to change the Constitution. Later when criticized in the Lok Sabha for his statement, he tried to circumvent his statement by saying that “if someone was hurt by his remarks about changing the Constitution and about secularism, he had no hesitation in tendering his apology.”

Surely BJP’s intentions have to be understood and his apology is purely strategic. BJP as a party has to work within the confines of Constitution as it has to swear by it legally. Still, when BJP led NDA Government came to power in 1998, it did appoint Venkatchaliah Commission to review the Constitution; probably that was the first open and subtle ‘statement of purpose’ from its side. It’s another matter that seeing the total opposition to its move of reviewing Constitution from large sections of society, the Commission report was dumped.

After Modi led NDA Government came to power (2014), on the occasion of Republic day 2015, it issued an advertisement with the preamble of Constitution in which words Secular and Socialist were missing. In November 2017 Yogi Adityanath stated that the word secularism is the biggest lie in India.

The BJP will not reveal its deeper agenda so easily at present. Still, it can be understood that BJP is not comfortable with the present Constitution and laws be it the one related to Article 370 (Kashmir), Article 25 (freedom of religion), article 30 (about minorities setting up educational institutions). As BJP is a part of RSS combine, one has to look at what RSS ideologues state, what its associates like VHP and others say on the issue. These organisations have times and again articulated their opposition to Indian Constitution and their goal of making the one based on Holy Indian scriptures.

As such the whole attempt of Hindu nationalist political formations is to try to pave the way for Hindu nationalism by using the democratic secular space which the present Constitution gives.RSS ideologue Golwalkar in his writings like ‘Bunch Of Thoughts’ argues that territorial nationalism, which is the basis of Indian Constitution, is a barbarism, since according to him a nation is ‘not a mere bundle of political and economic rights’ but an embodiment of national culture —in India, ‘ancient and sublime’ Hinduism. It sneers at democracy, which Golwalkar sees as alien to Hindu culture, and lavishes praise on the Code of Manu, whom Golwalkar salutes as ‘the first, the greatest, and the wisest lawgiver of mankind’.

When the Constituent Assembly of India passed the Constitution of India on November 26, 1949, RSS was not happy. Its organ, Organiser in an editorial on November 30, 1949, complained: “But in our Constitution, there is no mention of the unique constitutional development in ancient Bharat. Manu’s Laws were written long before Lycurgus of Sparta or Solon of Persia. To this day his laws as enunciated in the Manusmriti excite the admiration of the world and elicit spontaneous obedience and conformity. But to our constitutional pundits, that means nothing.”

VD Savarkar has been the major ideologue from whom most of the Hindu nationalists draw their inspiration. He argued: “Manusmriti is that scripture which is most worship-able after Vedas for our Hindu Nation and which from ancient times has become the basis of our culture-customs, thought and practice. This book for centuries has codified the spiritual and divine march of our nation. Even today the rules which are followed by crores of Hindus in their lives and practice are based on Manusmriti. Today Manusmriti is Hindu Law.”

Deendayal Upadhyay has been another major ideologue of RSS combine. He was part of Bharatiya Janasangh, previous avatar of BJP. He says that India had written a Constitution imitative of the West, divorced from any real connection to our mode of life and from authentically Indian ideas about the relationship between the individual and society.

Like previous ideologues Upadhyay also felt that the Constitution should embody a Hindu political philosophy befitting an ancient nation like Bharat, that of reducing the Indian national idea to a territory and the people on it was fallacious. According to him the nationalist movement, from the Khilafat agitation onwards, has turned towards a policy of appeasement of the Muslim community, a policy, in turn, sought to be justified by the need to forge a united front against the British.

He was all through critical of Indian Constitution, as he argued his case for the Hindu nation. His ideology seems to be one of the major inspirations for present leadership of BJP. BJP’s discomfort with articles 25, 30 and 370 etc. is mainly as these articles aim at affirmative action in a plural diverse society. These draw from the basic notion of Equality inherent in the Indian constitution. Most of the ideologues, the source of BJP ideology uphold Manusmririti, no wonder this was the precise book which architect of Indian Constitution, Babasaheb Ambedkar consigned to the flames!

1...1,9201,9211,922...2,697 Page 1,921 of 2,697

Stop Vilifying Madrasas and Start Discussing the Real Problem This Institution Faces

Judiciary has to Stand Up and Protect it’s Independence: Indira Jaising

Muslim councillor from Meerut hands over cow to Police, says “it is a dangerous animal”

The Myth of the Haj Subsidy

“Death is for the unmoving…”: K Neela on Lingayata Dharma and Vachana Sahitya

Protest Against Israeli PM Netanyahu’s India Visit Held in Delhi

Protest March against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s India visit was organised in Delhi by the Left Parties.

Bangladesh: Why are madrasas mushrooming?

Funding and management of Qawmi madrasas

The financial structure of Alia madrasa

Does the BJP intend to change the Indian Constitution?

JOIN OUR MAILING LIST

JOIN OUR MAILING LIST

Important Links

Other Links

CONNECT