Dear Shri Kiren Rijiju Ji,
First of all, let me congratulate you for successfully piloting the Waqf Bill, now rechristened UMEED, which in both Hindi and Urdu means “Hope”. I am sure President Droupadi Murmu will soon give her assent to the Bill and it will become the law of the land. In this context, I remember the agricultural Acts the Modi government had to rescind following a massive protest from the farmers.
I liked your assertion in the Lok Sabha that you yourself belong to a minority community and you do not feel any discrimination against minorities. As you are the minister in charge of minority affairs, can you say with confidence that there is no such discrimination?
As you are a Buddhist, I do not have to tell you that the Buddhists have built great Peace Pagodas like the one in Delhi and elsewhere. They are all architectural marvels and I never miss them on my visits to places like Leh in Ladakh, Darjeeling in West Bengal, and Kathmandu in Nepal.
I am sure that you will not contest me when I say that the greatest pilgrim centre for Buddhists the world over is not Lumbini in Nepal, where Siddhartha Gautama was born. Instead, it is the Mahabodhi Temple in Bodh Gaya where Lord Buddha attained enlightenment under a Bodhi tree. I have visited the place several times.
In the eighties, I did a cover story on the Mahabodhi Temple for the Sunday Magazine of the Hindustan Times. One of the highlights of the article was the demand the Buddhists were making for control of the temple. They resent Hindu Brahmins doing Puja there and the Hindus controlling the administrative affairs of the temple.
The agitation for control of the temple still goes on, though it does not get traction in the media. As a Buddhist and Minister for Minority Affairs, you will do a great service to the nation if you can liberate the Mahabodhi Temple from the immoral control of non-Buddhists. Instead, you want non-Muslims to have a say, if not control, of the Waqf Boards at the Centre and in the states.
You should see this in the light of the Tirupati temple authorities’ draconian decision to terminate the services of all their non-Hindu employees. The argument is that Tirupati temple belongs to the Hindus and only Hindus can work there. I don’t think you have taken any action against the retrenchment of the few non-Hindu employees.
The greatest Hindu pilgrimage centre in Kerala, from where I come, is Sabarimala, which is controlled by the Devaswom Board. The MLAs can vote for various posts in the board but only Hindu MLAs can take part in the voting. The Vaishnodevi temple in Jammu and Kashmir is run by a Trust. The Lieutenant-Governor holds the post of Chairman of the Trust.
If a non-Hindu is appointed governor, a Hindu has to be appointed chairman of the Trust. Once, when General S.K. Sinha was governor and no ice lingam was formed in the Amarnath cave, he managed to procure tonnes of ice from as far away as Jammu to create an ice lingam. Alas, a press photographer published the pictures of the ice lingam which had dirty hand marks of the workers who made it. Sinha escaped unscathed.
Early this week, the details of the will of Ratan Tata, worth Rs 10,000 crore, appeared in the media. Most of the wealth has gone to philanthropic organisations. What attracted me is a clause under which his favourite dog, Tito, and other pets will benefit from a Rs 12 lakh fund, which will be used to care for his pets, ensuring that each of them will receive Rs 30,000 per quarter for their care. He also mentioned that his cook, Rajan Shaw, will take care of Tito after his demise.
The executors of the will have a duty to ensure that the money is distributed as mandated by Tata.
In the seventh century, Umar ibn al-Khattab, also spelled Omar, who later became the Caliph, owned land on the shores of the Khyber. He approached the Prophet on what he should do with the land. He was advised to give it to Allah, which will, of course, deprive him of all his authority over the land. The land could be used only for religious or charitable purposes and the person responsible for it was known as Mutawalli. I owe this information to an article by Advocate T. Asaf Ali in the Madhyamam daily.
A Jew who fought unsuccessfully against the Prophet bequeathed all his property for similar purposes. All the rules and regulations governing Waqf follow from this precedent. This reaffirms the point that Waqf properties cannot be sold for profit; they can only be used for religious or charitable purposes.
Under UMEED, only a person who has been a practising Muslim for at least five years can will away his property as Waqf. Since you studied the Bill, let me ask you how will you determine whether a person remained a Muslim for five years or not?
A person becomes a Muslim when he dedicates his prayer solely to Allah and considers Mohammed as the final prophet and messenger of God. Of course, his religious practices are enumerated in the Five Pillars of Islam: the declaration of faith (shahadah), daily prayers (salah), almsgiving (zakat), fasting during the month of Ramadan (sawm), and the pilgrimage to Mecca (hajj) at least once in a lifetime.
Anybody can become a Christian and the longevity of his faith does not matter to God. That is why the thief on the cross attained salvation because he believed in Jesus as the Son of God. He did not live even for a day after his conversion. This being the case, on what basis do you say that to be a Muslim one must practice the religion for five years?
Last Sunday, Prime Minister Narendra Modi visited the RSS headquarters at Nagpur. He also visited the Deekshabhoomi, the ground where people led by Dr B.R. Ambedkar got ordained as Buddhists. This religious mass conversion at one place was the first ever of its kind in history. The day they took Deeksha, they became Buddhists.
You may like to know why Ambedkar chose Nagpur for his conversion to your religion. Nagpur is where the Nags lived on the banks of the Nag river. They were the ones who fought vigorously against the invading Aryans. And they were the ones who propagated Buddhism in far corners of the land, including Arunachal Pradesh, to which you belong.
When the British wanted to build a house for the Viceroy in Delhi, they did not go to a temple for a model. Instead, they looked at a Buddhist vihara to draw ideas. When you take UMEED to the Rashtrapati Bhavan for the President’s signature, please check whether the building resembles a temple or a Buddhist vihara.
On the day Parliament was debating the Waqf Bill, UP Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath claimed that the Waqf authorities had declared the area where the Mahakumbh was held as Waqf property. Even if it is true, did it prevent Yogi from driving away every Muslim selling even Bisleri water bottles from the banks of the Ganga?
Home Minister Amit Shah even claimed that the Waqf authorities could have declared Parliament House as Waqf property. You and your party have perfected the art of scare-mongering. You don’t even leave Aurangzeb, who died 318 years ago.
The whole world knows that Mukesh Ambani’s grotesque house, Antilia, in Mumbai—consuming power worth Rs 70 lakh every month—is situated on Waqf land. Has Ambani suffered on this account? But you portrayed the Waqf Boards as more powerful than even the Supreme Court.
And some persons, like Baselios Cleemis, the current Major Archbishop-Catholicos of the Syro-Malankara Catholic Church, fell for it. He saw the issue from the perspective of the residents of Munambam, numbering 600 families, mostly Catholic. If Ambani could not be evicted from his Antilia, how could they be evicted?
The broader issue was that the Muslims were not consulted on the drafting of the Bill. You mentioned that it was vetted by a parliamentary committee. Was even one suggestion of an Opposition member accepted? During the debate in the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha, was even one amendment suggested by an Opposition MP accepted? It was a Bill of the government, by the government, and for the government.
With non-Muslims allowed to decide Waqf-related issues, the Muslims will lose control of their Waqf properties. The Waqf Boards will be deprived of assets to run madrasas, orphanages, and hospitals. The Bill’s agenda is clear to the discerning.
Small wonder that the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC), which controls Sri Harmandir Sahib or Darbār Sahib, also called the Golden Temple, has opposed the Bill, for it knows that tomorrow, the government can amend the Sikh Gurdwara Act to their disadvantage. Alas, the Catholic Church leadership can’t see the woods for the trees.
The Catholic and other churches own thousands of acres of land and properties worth billions of rupees. Using the same argument, the government can easily take them over. In fact, many Church-run schools and colleges are situated on government land given by the British on lease for 100 years. The government has already started putting pressure on the church to vacate such properties, as in the Army Cantonment in New Delhi.
While Parliament was discussing the Waqf Bill, some Opposition members drew Parliament’s attention to the attack on two Catholic priests in Jabalpur. As Minister in charge of Minority Affairs, who prevented you from opening your mouth on the action you have taken on the matter?
Nonetheless, I was glad to hear you quoting the Sachar Committee report. Justice Rajinder Sachar appeared for me in a case the Punjab and Haryana High Court instituted, suo motu, against me and some of my colleagues at The Tribune. Have you ever thumbed the pages of his report except to find out what it said about Waqf properties? You say that if the Waqf properties are put to commercial use, Muslims will earn a lot.
That is exactly what is happening under crony capitalism. Government properties are handed over to the likes of Ambani and Adani so that they can become the world’s richest, pushing the poor down the ladder further and further. True, if they are handed over the Waqf properties, they will surely earn billions—so that they can have their swimming pools on their rooftops while the women in Mumbai stand for hours to get a pitcher of water.
By the way, the Sachar Committee made many suggestions, including a mechanism to monitor whether the government’s minority welfare measures benefit the communities concerned.
What amused me the most was your assertion that Muslim welfare was your government’s prime concern. You don’t have a single Muslim colleague in the ministry of which you are a member. Muslims constitute about 200 million in this country. It is unbelievable that the Prime Minister cannot find a single Muslim from among them to represent the community. Forget the Centre—mention one name of a Muslim minister in any of the BJP governments, from Gujarat to Manipur and Delhi to Uttarakhand.
Modi demonstrated his concern for Muslims by introducing the law banning triple talaq during his second term. Divorce frees a woman from marital bondage, especially when the husband no longer wishes to live with her. In many ways, it is better than abandonment of wives.
It has been over five years since the triple talaq law was enacted. Can you name even one conviction under it? The law was designed to appease Hindutvawadis rather than genuinely help Muslims. Unfortunately, the Waqf Bill follows the same pattern, aimed at depriving Muslims of their limited rights. I only wish Christians had realised— to borrow poet John Donne’s words—that the bell tolls not just for Muslims, but for them as well.
Yours etc.
Courtesy: Indian Currents