In Parbatipur, near Kolkata, Muslims and Hindus unite to create hair for Durga idols used in Durga Puja celebrations, preserving a unique tradition that showcases how art can unite people of diverse faiths. Similarly, Hindu calligrapher Anil Kumar Chawhan in Hyderabad has spent over two decades painting Quranic verses on mosque walls, fostering communal harmony and respect between religions.

In Bihar’s Dumrawan village, the Paswan family has maintained a century-old mosque for over 30 years, despite the village’s shift to a Hindu majority. Their dedication exemplifies the enduring power of shared cultural and spiritual respect. Lastly, the ‘Chali Mukte,’ 40 Sikh soldiers who returned to fight for righteousness in 1705, remind us that humanity transcends religious   boundaries, and faith should always serve the greater good.

Mumbai’s Muslim engraver of Jewish tombstones: a legacy of mutual respect

On a bright February morning in Mumbai’s Worli, 74-year-old Mohammad Abdul Yaseen was chiselling Hebrew characters into a grey stone slab in a small Jewish cemetery. Surrounded by tombstones with inscriptions in Hebrew, Marathi, and English, Yaseen’s meticulous work embodied both dedication and cultural harmony. As a devout Muslim, he is the only expert engraver of Jewish tombstones in Maharashtra, showcasing the deep bonds between different communities in the region. His expertise serves the Bene Israel community, a group of Jews who have lived along the Konkan Coast for two millennia, despite their dwindling numbers today.

Yaseen’s unique connection with the Bene Israel community reflects Mumbai’s long history of peaceful coexistence between Jews and Muslims. His mentor, Aaron Menashe, a Bene Israel tombstone maker, not only taught him the craft but also introduced him to the Hebrew language. Yaseen’s work continues to reflect the mutual respect shared between these communities, living side by side in neighbourhoods like Bhendi Bazaar, where synagogues and mosques have coexisted for centuries. Choosing to remain in Mumbai despite offers from Israel, Yaseen’s life stands as a testament to cultural harmony, with a simple, honest living dedicated to peace.

Harmony in craft: a village that unites through tradition, celebrates unity and diversity

In India, where religious tensions often make headlines, Parbatipur, a small village near Howrah, stands as a powerful symbol of unity and diversity. Situated just 30 km from Kolkata, this village is renowned for its unique tradition of creating the lustrous hair for Maa Durga idols, an essential element of Durga Puja celebrations. As per The Statesman, “The amazing fact about the art of making hair is that it is made primarily by the Muslims,” highlighting how this small community has transcended religious barriers to contribute to the festival’s grandeur. While the work began in the 1960s under the guidance of Ekhlas Chacha, a Muslim craftsman, it now involves the entire village, regardless of faith. Parbatipur’s success story is a shining example of how communities can come together to preserve cultural practices and create something beautiful, celebrating harmony amid differences.

The craft of Durga’s hair

The hair of Maa Durga idols, crafted from dyed jute bales, plays an integral role in the grandeur of Durga Puja celebrations, with its long, flowing mane symbolizing feminine beauty. As per The Statesman, “At present, the villagers make hair for almost 30,000 Durga idols,” reflecting the widespread demand for their craft. The process involves colouring the jute bales, drying them, and cutting them into different sizes, all performed with precision by the local Muslim artisans. The fact that this craft has brought together people of varying religious backgrounds to support a shared cultural tradition makes it a testament to the strength of India’s unity and diversity, showcasing that in their hands, art transcends religion.

Harmonious unity through Art: A Hindu Calligrapher’s journey of peace

For over two decades, Anil Kumar Chawhan, a Hindu calligrapher from Hyderabad, has been a powerful symbol of harmonious unity, painting Quranic verses on the walls of mosques across the city. His journey began humbly with painting Urdu signboards for shops, leading him to master the art of calligraphy and learn the language. Chawhan’s work gained recognition when he was invited to paint the Masjid-e-Noor Mosque, marking the start of his impactful contributions to the religious landscape of Hyderabad.

His calligraphy, including verses from Surah Yaseen at Jamia Nizamia University’s library, has bridged the gap between communities, resonating with people of all faiths. Chawhan’s unwavering dedication to promoting communal harmony reflects the true spirit of unity. “Hindus and Muslims should live in peace,” he says, embodying a message of love, respect, and understanding through his art.

Link: https://www.facebook.com/share/p/19YAVDxqpt/

Everyday Harmony: A Hindu family’s legacy of caring for a Mosque

In Bihar’s Nalanda district, the Paswan family of Dumrawan village stands as a powerful testament to communal harmony. Despite the village’s transformation, from a once-Muslim community to an entirely Hindu one, the Paswan family has faithfully maintained a century-old mosque for over 30 years. This tradition, passed down from their ancestors, continues with unwavering dedication, as Anil Paswan, his wife Sadhna Devi, and their son Durgesh Kumar care for the mosque, from cleaning to lighting incense, despite their modest means.

Their heartfelt commitment exemplifies the spirit of unity and respect across communities, proving that harmony can thrive even in changing times. The Paswan family’s legacy is a shining example of how shared cultural and spiritual respect can transcend boundaries, creating an enduring symbol of peace and coexistence.

Link: https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1Ajdn86FGS/

Humanity has no religion

In a world where debates often spark endless, meaningless arguments, it’s essential to remember that humanity has no religion. Our shared values, kindness, and respect for each other’s differences are what truly define us. Take the story of the 40 Sikh soldiers, who once parted ways with Guru Gobind Singh Ji, as an example. These 40 brave souls, leaving Anandpur Sahib Qila, later became known as ‘Chali Mukte’, after returning to fight valiantly during the Battle of Muktsar in 1705. With deep repentance and unwavering courage, they sacrificed their lives for righteousness, ultimately earning eternal liberation (Mukti). Their story serves as a powerful reminder that faith and humanity transcend religion.

In the age of social media, it’s easy to get caught up in divisive conversations in comment sections, but let’s take a step back and remember the true essence of life: humanity. Regardless of background, faith, or beliefs, we are all united in our shared human experiences. Let’s embrace each other’s differences, celebrate our collective strengths, and foster unity, for humanity has no religion.

Link: https://www.instagram.com/the_colorful_singh/

However, in a world often defined by religious and cultural divides, the stories of individuals and communities embracing unity and mutual respect offer a hopeful reminder of our shared humanity. From the dedication of Mohammad Abdul Yaseen, chiselling Hebrew characters on Jewish tombstones, to the Paswan family’s unwavering care for a mosque in a Hindu-majority village, these acts transcend religious boundaries. The unity witnessed in Parbatipur, where Muslims and Hindus work together on Durga Puja hair, and in Hyderabad, where a Hindu calligrapher paints Quranic verses, highlights the power of art and tradition in fostering peace. The bravery of the ‘Chali Mukte,’ Sikh soldiers who fought for righteousness, reminds us that faith should serve the greater good of humanity. These stories show that despite our differences, we can find common ground through respect, love, and shared cultural practices. As we embrace diversity, we celebrate the universal truth: humanity, above all, has no religion.

Related

Ordinary individuals, extraordinary courage: Waris Khan and Arif Bamane’s rescue stories

India’s Spirit of Harmony: countering divisiveness through shared celebrations and solidarity

Ganesh Chaturthi: Celebrating unity beyond religious boundaries

The post Unity Beyond Religion: Stories of shared humanity and mutual respect appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The incident allegedly took place over the blocking of a vehicle’s path carrying some goods.

Hubballi-Dharwad City Commissioner of Police Renuka Sukumar confirmed to an independent news portal, South First that it was merely a quarrel between two groups. She did however state that the groups indulged in fisticuffs, but clarified that the incident was not communal in nature.

The police have registered a case against four persons belonging to the minority community over the incident. They have been booked under Sections 341 (wrongful restraint), 34 (common intention), 504 (intentional insult provoking breach of peace), and 323 (assault) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The case was registered based on the complaint by Manjunath Udakeri of Lokuru in Dharwad. He is the brother of Irappa Rudrappa Udakeri, the victim.

“We have secured two people involved in the assault and are investigating further into the case,” Renuka told the media.

The quarrel

According to the police, the incident occurred at around 6:45 am on Saturday, February 3. Irappa and his driver had just arrived at the market with their goods vehicle loaded with vegetables.

Injured Irappa Rudrappa Udakeri in Dharwad

It is reported that when Irappa actually entered the market, another vegetable vendor Asfak’s son and son-in-law Abdul Rehman had spread their vegetables on the road to sort them, hampering movement. An irritated Irappa, who knew Asfak, apparently demanded they move the vegetables so that his vehicle could pass through.

The response he got from the two was that if he wanted to pass by with his vehicle, he would have to drive over their vegetables. The exchange quickly turned ugly, with the assembled people taking sides. The duo allegedly hurled vulgar abuses at Irappa and then started assaulting him after two others restrained him.

According to his brother’s complaint, Irappa was repeatedly punched in the face. He sustained injuries to his mouth and could not speak, said the police, adding that he also bled from his nose.

Witnesses informed the cops, who rushed to the spot and shifted Irappa to a hospital.

No communal angle, say cops

“Irappa could not speak to the police officers as he had injuries to his mouth. His friend Nadaf (belonging to the minority community), who was at the spot and an eyewitness to the incident, gave a statement to the police on Irappa’s behalf,” CP Renuka Sukumar told South First.

However, rumours started spreading on social media that a farmer was attacked by four men belonging to the minority community just because he was a Hindu.

The Hindu Janajagruti Samiti (HJS) Karnataka unit spokesperson Mohan Gowda posted on X, “Yesterday radical Muslims vendors beaten to Hindu poor Farmer in Dharwad APMC market for selling vegetables. Hindus farmers seviourly injured and admitted Hospital. It shows how Hindus are unsafe in Karnataka. [sic]”

However, the Hubballi-Dharwad police clarified that there was no communal angle to the incident.

“In fact, a friend of Irappa from the minority community named Nadaf helped him by communicating to the police about the incident,” the CP also added in their conversation with  South First. However, this has not stopped HJS from continuing with its communal diatribe.

Related:

Temple fairs and the saga of economic boycott: Dakshina Kannada

Don’t stop at Muslim-owned dhabas, VHP, Bajrang Dal warn buses in Gujarat

Provocative poster in Delhi’s Brahmpuri calls on Hindu landlords to not sell to Muslim buyers

2023: Muslims speak up on life amid targeted hatred

The post Ultra right-wing outfit gives Dharwad market brawl communal colour; police counter with facts appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In its order, the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate C V Rana, while acquitting Mohammad Akhtar Shaikh, observed that the complainant “failed to prove that the accused was a Muslim, who had posed as a Hindu bearing the name Mukesh Gupta, with a job in the Railways and had hidden the fact that he was married earlier”.

“The case is surrounded by a cloud of suspicion, and this court believes that the accused should get the benefit of doubt. Taking into account the evidence and statements of witnesses on the record, the complainant side had failed to prove the suspicion in court (about the accused being a Muslim pretending to be a Hindu) and the marriage that took place between them should not be considered as unlawful conversion,” the court also said.

Following the order, Shaikh was released from Surat Central Jail. The case concerns a complaint filed at Dindoli police station by 19-year old Pooja Sahu, a resident of Dindoli in Surat, against her husband Shaikh from Limbayat.

Pooja Sahu had alleged that Shaikh, who was from Samastipur in Bihar, had masqueraded as a Hindu man named Mukesh Gupta and married her “in a temple” at Kadodara village, on the outskirts of Surat, in 2019. The marriage was allegedly solemnised under the Hindu Marriage Act. The complaint also said that the couple had a son, who was given a Hindu name.

In August 2021, Sahu claimed that she stumbled upon the Aadhaar card of her husband and found that he was a Muslim. This was followed by frequent quarrels between the couple.

Sahu, in her criminal complaint, had further alleged that while Shaikh at first told her that he was a railway employee, she later found that he runs a paan shop near Udhna railway station in Surat. She claimed that Shaikh had taken cash worth Rs 13.7 lakh from three of her relatives on the pretext of getting them all jobs in the Railways. When he failed to get them jobs, he did not return the money, she also alleged.

Sahu further claimed that Shaikh tried to forcefully convert her to Islam and when she refused, he beat her up and “threatened to kill her”. However, when contacted, Shaikh’s lawyer V S Patil said, “The complainant works in a cell phone company. The two came in contact when Shaikh went to her store to get a connection in 2018… He also helped her get more customers to meet her target.”

“Their friendship turned into an affair and they used to visit the dargah together. She was aware that he was a Muslim. To get married, they mutually agreed to change Shaikh’s name to Mukesh Gupta, so that she could convince her family members for their wedding… They got married at a temple,” he added. “The court found that there was no evidence to show that the accused beat her up and even forced her to follow Muslim rituals,” Patil said. The assistant Public Prosecutor a M Miyatara reportedly said, “We will look into the details of the judgment and then move a higher court.”

Acting on Sahu’s complaint filed on August 11, 2021, the police booked Shaikh under sections 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 406 (criminal breach of trust), 420 (cheating), 494 (marrying again during life time of husband or wife ), 495 (same offence with concealment of former marriage from person with whom subsequent marriage is contracted), 498(a) (husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code. Moreover, he was also booked under the Gujarat Freedom of Religion (Amendment) Act, 2021.

The post Surat man, arrested for false accusations of “posing as Hindu to marry” acquitted by court appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The post Learn How to Counter Hate from Furqan and His Children appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Hindu and Muslim Communalism¹
(From Selected Works of Jawaharlal Nehru: Volume Six)

With Independence Day right around the corner, the Indian Cultural Forum will be doing a series on the ideas that built India. From national movements to regional resistances, there have been multiple ideologies and leaders who’ve shaped the country’s desire for sovereignty and the post-Independence period. In the coming weeks we will attempt to bring together writing on many of these leaders and what legacies they have left us. As Independence Day approaches there will be a singular and deafening narrative built on hyper-nationalism. Instead, ICF will be publishing the many ideas, some contrary to each other, that actually lead to the formation of a free nation. 

‘Who is Bharat Mata, whose victory you wish?’ asked Jawaharlal Nehru—a leading light of the Indian freedom movement who would become the country’s first prime minister—at a public gathering in 1936. And then he explained: the mountains and rivers, forests and fields were of course dear to everyone, but what counted ultimately were ‘the people of India…spread out all over this vast land. Bharat Mata, Mother India, [is] essentially these millions of people, and victory to her [is] victory to these people.’

Edited by Purushottam Agrawal, ”’Who is Bharat Mata?’: On History, Culture and the Idea of India” is a collection of writings and speeches by and on Nehru. It shows us the mind—the ideology, born of experience, observation and deep study—behind Nehru’s democratic and inclusive idea of India. It is a book of particular relevance at a time when “nationalism” and the slogan “Bharat Mata ki Jai” are being used to construct a militant and purely emotional idea of India that excludes millions of residents and citizens. The following is an excerpt from the chapter “The Idea and the Making of India”.

…It must be remembered that the communalism of a majority community must of necessity bear a closer resemblance to nationalism than the communalism of a minority group. One of the best tests of its true nature is what relation it bears to the national struggle. If it is politically reactionary or lays stress on communal problems rather than national ones then it is obviously anti-national.

The Simon Commission,² as is well known, met with a widespread and almost unanimous boycott in India. Bhai Parmanandji,³ in his recent presidential address at Ajmer, says that this boycott was unfortunate for the Hindus, and he approvingly mentions that the Punjab Hindus (probably under his guidance) cooperated with the Commission. Thus Bhaiji is of opinion that, whatever the national aspect of the question might have been, it was desirable for the Hindus to cooperate with the British Government in order to gain some communal advantages. This is obviously an anti-national attitude. Even from the narrow communal point of view it is difficult to see its wisdom, or communal advantages can only be given at the expense of another community, and when both seek the favours of the ruling power, there is little chance of obtaining even a superficial advantage.

Bhaiji’s argument, repeatedly stated, is that the British Government is so strongly entrenched in India that it cannot be shaken by any popular movement and therefore it is folly to try to do so. The only alternative is to seek its favours. That is an argument which I can only characterise, with all respect to him, as wholly unworthy of any people however fallen they might be.

Bhaiji’s view is that the cry of Hindu-Muslim unity is a false cry and a wrong ideal to aim at because the power of gift is in the hands of the government. Granting this power of gift, every cry other than one of seeking the government’s favours is futile. And if the possibility of Hindu-Muslim cooperation and collaboration is ruled out,⁴ nationalism is also ruled out in the country-wide sense of the word. The inevitable consequence, and Bhaiji accepts this, is what the calls “Hindu nationalism”, which is but another name for Hindu communalism. What is the way to this? Cooperation with British imperialism. “I feel an impulse within me,” says Bhaiji in his presidential address, “that the Hindus would willingly cooperate with Great Britain if their status and responsible position as the premier community in India is recognised in the political institutions of new India.”

This attitude of trying to combine with the ruling power against another community or group is the natural and only policy which communalism can adopt. It fits in of course entirely with the wishes of the ruling power which can then play off one group against another. It was the policy which was adopted by the Muslim communalists with some apparent temporary advantages to themselves. It is the policy which the Hindu Mahasabha partly favoured from its earliest days but could not adopt wholeheartedly because of the pressure of nationalist Hindus, and which its leaders now seem to have definitely adopted.

Dr Moonje,⁵ presiding over the C.P. Hindu Conference on May 17, 1933 made it clear that “the Mahasabha never had any faith in the kind of noncooperation which Mahatma Gandhi has been preaching and practising. It believes in the eternal Sanatan Law of stimulus and response, namely, responsive cooperation. The Mahasabha holds that whatever may be the constitution of the legislatures, they should never be boycotted.” Dr. Moonje is an authority on Sanatan Law, but I hope it does not lay down that the response to a kick should be grovelling at the feet of him who kicks. This speech was made when a widespread national struggle was going on and there was unprecedented repression under the ordinance regime. I shall not discuss here the wisdom of stating, long before the British-made constitution had taken shape, that whatever happens they would work it. Was this not an invitation to the government to ignore the Mahasabha for in any event it would accept the new dispensation?

Dr Moonje himself went to the Round Table Conference in 1930, at the height of the civil disobedience movement, though in justice to him it must be stated that he had declared that he went in his individual capacity. Subsequently of course the Mahasabha took full part in the London conferences and committees.

Of the part taken by the Mahasabha representatives in these deliberations, especially by those from the Punjab and Sind, I wish only to say that it was a most painful one. Politically it was most reactionary and efforts were made to increase the reserved powers and safeguards of the British Government or the Governors in order to prevent the Muslim majorities in certain provinces from exercising effective power. The identical policy and argument of the Muslim communalists in regard to the whole of India were repeated by Hindu communalists in regard to certain provinces. But of course the special powers of Governors were not going to be confined to some provinces. They would inevitably apply to all the provinces. The reason for this reactionary attitude in both the cases was of course fear of the majority. Whatever the reason, this played entirely into the hands of the British Government.
[…]
Reality and Myth⁶

(From Selected Works of Jawaharlal Nehru: Volume Six)

Groups of upper class people try to cover up their own class interests by making it appear that they stand for the communal demands of religious minorities or majorities.

A critical examination of the various communal demands put forward on behalf of Hindus, Muslims or others reveals that they have nothing to do with the masses. At the most they deal with some jobs for a few of the unemployed intellectuals but it is obvious that the problem even of the unemployed middle class intellectuals cannot be solved by a redistribution of state jobs. There are far too many unemployed persons of the middle class to be absorbed in state or other services and their number is growing at a rapid pace. So far as the masses are concerned there is absolutely no reference to them or to their wants in the numerous demands put forward by communal organizations. Apparently the communalists do not consider them as worthy of attention. What is there, in the various communal formulae, in regard to the distress of the agriculturists, their rent or revenue or the staggering burden of debt that crushes them? Or in regard to the factory or railway or other workers who have to face continuous cuts in wages and a vanishing standard of living? Or the lower middle classes who, for want of employment and work, are sinking in the slough of despair? Heated arguments take place about seats in councils and separate and joint electorates and the separation of provinces which can affect or interest only a few. Is the starving peasant likely to be interested in this when hunger gnaws his stomach? But our communal friends take good care to avoid these real issues, for a solution of them might affect their own interests, and they try to divert people’s attention to entirely unreal and, from the mass point of view, trivial matters.

Communalism is essentially a hunt for favours from a third party—the ruling power. The communalist can only think in terms of a continuation of foreign domination and he tries to make the best of it for his own particular group. Delete the foreign power and the communal arguments and demands fall to the ground. Both the foreign power and the communalists, as representing some upper class groups, want no essential change of the political and economic structure; both are interested in the preservation and augmentation of their vested interests. Because of this, both cannot tackle the real economic problems which confront the country, for a solution of these would upset the present social structure and devest the vested interests. For both, this ostrichlike policy of ignoring real issues is bound to end in disaster. Facts and economic forces are more powerful than governments and empires and can only be ignored at peril.

Communalism thus becomes another name for political and social reaction and the British Government, being the citadel of this reaction in India, naturally throws its sheltering wings over a useful ally. Many a false trail is drawn to confuse the issue; we are told of Islamic culture and Hindu culture, of religion and old custom, of ancient glories and the like. But behind all this lies political and social reaction, and communalism must therefore be fought on all fronts and given no quarter. Because the inward nature of communalism has not been sufficiently realised, it has often sailed under false colours and taken in many an unwary person. It is an undoubted fact that many a Congressman has almost unconsciously partly succumbed to it and tried to reconcile his nationalism with this narrow and reactionary creed. A real appreciation of its true nature would demonstrate that there can be no common ground between the two. They belong to different species. It is time that Congressmen and others who have flirted with Hindu or Muslim or Sikh or any other communalism should understand this position and make their choice. No one can have it both ways, and the choice lies between political and social progress and stark reaction. An association with any form of communalism means the strengthening of the forces- of reaction and of British imperialism in India; it means opposition to social and economic changes and a toleration of the present terrible distress of our people; it means a blind ignoring of world forces and events.

What are communal organizations? They are not religious although they confine themselves to religious groups and exploit the name of religion. They are not cultural and have done nothing for culture although they talk bravely of a past culture. They are not ethical or moral groups for their teachings are singularly devoid of all ethics and morality. They are certainly not economic groupings for there is no economic link binding their members and they have no shadow of an economic programme. Some of them claim not to be political even. What then are they?
As a matter of fact they function politically and their demands are political, but calling themselves non-political, they avoid the real issues and only succeed in obstructing the path of others.

1. 27 November 1933. The Tribune, 30 November 1933. Reprinted in Recent Essays and Writings, (Allahabad, 1934), 47–61.
2. The Simon Commission was a group of 7 British MPs sent to India in 1928 to study constitutional reforms and make recommendations to the government.
3. Bhai Parmanand was an Indian nationalist and a prominent leader of the Hindu Mahasabha.
4. Bhai Parmanand stated that “we have reached a stage when the Congress with its theory of Swaraj through Hindu-Moslem unity and civil disobedience goes entirely out of the field.”
5. Another Mahasabha leader
6. Statement to the press, Allahabad, 5 January 1934. The Tribune, 8 January 1934. Reprinted in Recent Essays and Writings, (Allahabad, 1934), 72-81.

Courtesy: Indian Cultural Forum

The post Hindu and Muslim Communalism appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The incident took place only 300 feet from the local police outpost. Telephonic conversations of Sabrangindia with local people, who requested anonymity, alleged that all mobile numbers of the police personnel on duty at the outpost were unavailable when the victim population desperately made calls requesting pritection.There is a serious concern about the  probability of more such attacks.

Represented by an intemperate leader from the BJP, Tinsukia has been simmering with communal tensions since September.  Sabrangindia had reported, that over five days in September 2018, the district has been witnessing acute communal flare-ups.  Until now, there have been several reported attacks, targeted at the Muslim minority in the District, and two group clashes have also been witnessed.

Image Courtesy:mapsofindia.com

The killings on the late evening of Thursday, November 1, take place in an atmosphere of extreme tension and polarisation. Over the last few days, there has been prevailing war of words between the surrendered ULFA leaders and controversial BJP MLA, a  Bengali leader Siladitya Dev. The BJP MLA has been reportedly, continuously making  controversial and provocaive remarks against some organizations representing  Assamese society and surrendered ULFA militants. This has led to a bitter war of words with the surrendered ULFA leaders also reportedly making provocative speeches against the BJP Leader and MLA Siladitya Dev and the Bengali community at large. It was in this atmosphere of extreme provocation and polarisation that the tragic shottings of tonight have taken place. The slain persons were identified as Subal Das, Shyamol Biswas,  Abinash Biswas, Dhananjoy Namasudra and Ananta Biswas, reported Shillong Times.  Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee said the Trinamool Congress will take out rallies in different parts of north and south Bengal to protest the killing of people from her state, NDTV repors.

Meanwhile, Debabrata Saikia, leader of the opposition in the Assam assembly has sharply condemned the attack. “I condemn the cold-blooded killing of at least four-five Bengali speakers in Bisonibari of Dhola, Tinsukia district. My heart goes out to the victims and their families. I had warned during my press conference today that the policy of polarization tacitly condoned or even sponsored by the BJP-led Govts in Assam might lead to a gory conflict. Shame on the BJP! Your greed for votes has claimed the first innocent ethnic-clash victims today in Assam.
I appeal to all sections of the people of Assam to exercise restraint despite flagrant attempts to foment a violent confrontation. The Government must ensure safety and security to life and property of all people living in the state.

Chief Minister Sarbananda Sonowal has also condemned “the killing of innocent people” and conveyed his sympathy to the bereaved families. “Strong action will be taken against the perpetrators of this dastardly violence. We will not tolerate such cowardly act,” he told PTI. Sonowal said he has directed state ministers Keshav Mahanta and Tapan Gogoi along with DGP Kuladhar Saikia to rush to the spot. “We will not spare the culprits of the killings and will be brought to book,” he said. The chief minister appealed to the people of Assam to maintain peace and harmony. He also directed all deputy commissioners and SPs to remain alert.

Image Courtesy: Sabrangindia Team

Siladitya Dev’s Controversial Record

Dev’s extreme and provocative speeches have continued to fan tensions and hatred in the area. The state unit of the ruling party had been caight in a bind over the process of recording the National Register of Citizens (NRC) and its capricious policies around the Citizenship Bill sought to be thrust down on the people of Assam, Dev has been simulataneously criticising the NRC itself while pushing for the Citizenship Bill. Weeks ago, an assam Bandh opposing the Citizenship Bill was a resounding success despite all manners of coercive tactics employed by the government to prevent small and big businesses and government servants participating in the state wide protest. Ever since the saffron party won power in this north eastern state, acute tensions and polarisations have percolated to the polity.

Tinsukia Simmers
In the oil-rich town of Doomdooma, the first Communal clash broke out on the day of Ganesh Chaturthi festival. On the same day, September 13, on Rajendra Prasad road,  some Muslims began to practice with the Tajia procession, on the eve the Muharram processions. This rehearsal of the Tajia  procession was begun from the Muslim populated area of the town after 10 pm. Close by, celebrations around the Ganesh Puja had been going on since the early hours of the same day. Though the minority population is barely five per cent targeted incidents have been reported.

Image Courtesy: Sabrangindia Team
 

The post Five Shot Dead at Tinsukia, Assam: Hate Speech Precedes Targeted Killings appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Picture Courtesy: thelawofattraction.com
 

The post Gandhi accepted his faults, so should we appeared first on SabrangIndia.

 
Ban on menstruating women entering the Sabarimala Ayyappa temple is a violation of core Indian Spiritual values and the Constitution of India.

 
Perverted practioners of status-quoist traditionalism have been opposing the entry of menstruating women for worship in the Sabarimala Ayyappa temple in Kerala. This ban effectively seeks to curtail entry of the largest denomination of its devotees annually. It is a step that violates, knowingly or unknowingly, the core values of Hindu Spiritualism, postulated in the fundamental, foundational scripture of Hinduism, the Rig Veda (1500 BC). Apart from the transcendent text, the basic ideals of the Constitution of India, the Fundamental Rights, Duties and the Preamble contained within it, have also been violated by this ban imposed on women devotees.
 
Hindu scholars and devotees of the various Hindu sects have been unanimous in emphasizing the imperative of adhering to the lofty ideals contained in the Vedas. The Rig Veda states that the Earth is upheld by the truth while the Heaven is upheld by the Sun (X-85-1).
 
All those opposing the entry of females in Sabarimala temple are obviously going against the truth and logic of Biology. All phenomena of nature are expressions of God’s will; so is the menstruation cycle in women. Holding this as a ground for not allowing women to have Darshan (direct vision) of Lord Ayyappa is a cruel contradiction, limiting both the act of worship and the form of Divinity to a male action and vision. Lord Ayyappa, a symbol of the omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent God Almighty Mythology manifest in the Dharma Sanstha (Lord Ayyappa) goes far beyond this narrow vision.  
 
Lord Ayyappa has the combined divinity from two of the Hindu Triumvirate Gods – Lord Shiva as father and Lord Vishnu in his female form of enchantress, Mohini as mother. How can a woman, who represents the female aspect of sanctity and motherhood be kept away from offering their pious devotion and spiritual aspirations to Lord Ayappa? The Lord is called Hari (Vishnu) Hara (Shiva) Suta (son).  
 
The restriction of women from visiting Sabarimala Shrine may have initially stemmed from the poor infrastructure and inaccessible roads leading up to the shrine during its inception in the 8^th century AE. Ayyappa worship was started after the advent of Islam in Kerala, in the 7th century, and the deity’s close friend was a Muslim trader – Baber, addressed as Vavar Swamy in Malayalam, whose temple / Dargah is adjacent to the Sanctum sanctorum, the Garbha Griha, of Lord Ayyappa.
 
The Rig Veda exhorts all for being receptive to knowledge. “Let noble thoughts come to us from everywhere (I 89 – 1).”

Science and technology has, over the centuries improved access to the Shrine of Sabarimala. Sabrimala has millions of visiting devotees who return for the worship at the Shrine with overwhelming devotion. Preventing women devotees from offering prayers to Lord Ayyappa on grounds of their feeble physico-mental conditions and citing insufficient safety and security in the Sabarimala hills is utterly baseless.

How can the biological fluids from a women’s body be anathema, while the male devotees voluntarily discharging semen due to pressure of testosterone (night emissions/wet dreams) during their stay in Sabarimala temple premises, be allowed? Are males superior biologically, spiritually and from a religions perspective?
 
If the posturing against women devotees arises from apprehensions that the young women devotees will become objects of temptation for male worshippers, then any male devotee nurturing such unholy thoughts is ineligible and unfit to visit Sabarimala shrine. It is not the women, but the men who need to be restrained.
 
A reference to a widely quoted advice in “Hitopadesha” (Gems of friendly advice) epitomising the essence of Hinduism is relevant. The sloka proclaims “A truly knowledgeable person is one who treats other mans’ property as mere clod, perceives other women to be like one’s mother and realizes that his own soul (Atma) is permeating in all living beings.” Are women inferior to men in the eyes of the spiritual Lord? History does not testify to such a contention.
 
Pure and ideal Hinduism, as explained in the Vedas and Upanishads, as opposed to the condemnable lop-sided sub-scriptures of Smrutis by Manu, Parasara, Yajnavalka and so on and the Epics of Ramayana and Mahabharata, have no incompatibility with post Renaissance modern values of democracy, liberalism, equality, fraternity, dignity and human rights. Non-intrusive Hinduism allows its followers to choose any God and accepts that there could be multiple paths, all equally divine, leading to God. In fact, the brigands who demolished Babri Masjid in 1992 had indulged in a sacrilegious un-Hindu crime.
 
Moreover, it does not specify any dress code, language or prescribed food for worshippers. Non-vegetarianism is acceptable and Lord Ram, Krishna, Saint Rama Krishna, Swami Vivekananda and so on were all non-vegetarians. Hinduism is even accommodative and flexible to Atheism as a view and as a legitimate intellectual pursuit. Atheist religions of Buddhism and Jainism flourished for many centuries in India. There were no serious objections in declaring Lord Buddha as one of the incarnations of Lord Vishnu, by replacing Lord Balram, the cousin of Lord Krishna.
 
The unequivocal spiritual destination of Hinduism is the utilisation of every moment of life towards one’s self through divine realisation, enlightenment, empowerment and value–addition. Simultaneous efforts to deepen and enhance empathy towards all living beings by enhancing their welfare and well-being are initiated in this religion. The goal of life is not denied to women by the Hindu scriptures. So by denying them the right to worship in the Ayyappa temple, the traditionalists are negating Hindus spiritual laws.
 
The methodology of pursuit of knowledge (Jnana Yoga) paths of self–less action (Karma Yoga) and deep devotion by sacrificing ones ego (Bhakti Yoga) are tools for self-realisation. Many women have proved their merit in all these fields. Avvyar (2^nd Century BCE in Tamil Nadu), Merabai (Rajasthan) Mata Amrutananda May (Kerala) are illustrative instances. The perversions of present day Hinduism is from the exclusivist, pseudo-fundamentalist radical fringe elements, acting as foot-soldiers of the Sangh Parivar and subverting the quintessential Hindus spiritualism, through unethical and even violent means.
 
Similar elements among the followers of Islam, like ISIS, Al Queda and Taliban are de-spiritualising the holy religion preached by Muhammed the Prophet (pbuh) Salallahou Alayhe Wasallam
 
The human physico-mental personality, in the ascending order, is categorized by Bhagavad Gita, as
1. Body 2. Five Senses 3. Mind-centre of emotions 4. Intellect and the Atma (Soul). Bhagavad Gita, Sloka 42 of chapter 3 says “The senses are said to be superior to the body; the mind is superior to the senses, the intellect is superior to the mind; and what is superior to the intellect is Atma.” So the body condition of a devotee is not relevant for his/her seeking self-realisation or divine grace through visits to the temple or any of three yogas.
 
Misplaced sensitivity displaced by sexist, misogynist Hindu orthodox groups, stressing on self-created, ill-founded unscientific menstrual taboos, for preventing women visiting Sabarimala temple is in total violation of the spirit of the Bhagavad Gita.
 
How can the biological fluids from a women’s body can be anathema, while the male devotees voluntarily discharging semen due to pressure of testosterone (night emissions/wet dreams) during their stay in Sabarimala temple premises; be allowed? Are males superior biologically, spiritually and from a religions perspective?
 
No ban has been imposed on the entry of menstruating animals near the shrine of Sabarimala.

In a Bhagavati temple in Kerala – Chenganoor/Alleppy District – as well as in Kamakhya temple (Assam), red spots appear once a year on the robes of the Godess to this date”. So when Mother Godess, in all her physical disposition is worshipped, by what logic and scriptural or religious authority, can women in a similar condition, be deprived of their inalienable right to worship before the Sabarimala shrine?

 
Significantly in “Tripura Sundari Ashtakam”, an invocation of Mother Godess, authored by Adi Shankaracharya, the deity is portrayed as a menstruating woman. The website of Kamakodi Mandala (www.kamakodimandala.com) interpreted the 6^th Sloka of this Ashtakam as follows “The Devi is described as being habituated in a blue sari with red spots, as the first menstrual flow, shows itself when a woman is ready to bear, so on the blue welkin (sky or heaven), the Devi’s raiment (clothing), signs appear, heralding creation.
 
In a Bhagavati temple in Kerala – Chenganoor/Alleppy District – as well as in Kamakhya temple (Assam), red spots appear once a year in the robes of the Godess to this date”. So when Mother Godess, in all her physical disposition is worshipped, by what logic and scriptural or religious authority, can women in similar condition, be deprived of their inalienable right to worship before the Sabarimala shrine?
 
We should endorse a proposal to send the Kerala Temple authorities for a crash course on the basics of Hindu Spiritualism, Tantric worship and attributes of a true devotee (Bhakta) as per Narada Bhakti Sutra. In Chengannor Devi temple, the Godess in menstrual cycle is offered special poojas by devotees.
 
At the entrance of Sabarimala temple, the Upanishadic dictum “Tat Twam Asi – That Art Thou – one of the four Mahavakyas of Hinduism – is prominently displayed. These words from Chandogya Upanishad (6-8-7) tells the devotee that “what you are seeking is within yourself” in the form of Atma (Soul). This also would establish the senselessness in giving any importance to the bodily condition of a devotee, though there are no regulations in fixing the standards of physical hygiene, clothings etc (all within individual control) as a condition for appearing before the deity.
 
Inexorably, the sole imperative attribute of a true devotee is the purity of the heart, as testified by Rig Veda thus, “If the heart is impure and malicious, then the God’s worship will also be unfruitful. Therefore God’s worship must be carried out with a ‘nishpap’ (sinless) heart. “VIII/61/11) Jesus Christ in his Sermon on the Mount declares” Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God! (Bible, ST Mathew 5-8)
 
The famous Sanskrit aphorism, Sa Vidya Ya Vimuktayae, was adopted by Mahatma Gandhi, as motto of the Gujarat Vidyapith, Ahmedabad. Kerala temple managers should opt for liberating women from ‘spiritual slavery’ imposed by male chauvinism for perpetuation of their domination.
 
The above delineated scriptural ethos does not sanction, support or justify any ban on women of productive age from the worship of Lord Ayyappa in the sanctum sanctorum of the Sabarimala temple. Further, the Constitution of India in Article 13, declared illegal all laws including Ordinances, customs, useage, rule, regulation, order and notification, which are inconsistent with the provisions of Part III (Fundamental Rights).
 
Let us hope that the Apex Court will accept the valid grounds advanced by petitioners seeking entry of woman devotees in Sabarimala temple at par with men. Simultaneously “true Hindus” should campaign for removing gender prejudice and the purposeful implementation of the Vedic vision as noted below.
 
“Come together, all of you, speak in one voice, know with one mind, even like the Gods, who, of yore knew with one mind and together had their share of enjoyment”.
 
“Together may they utter the mantra, may they unite together, may their mind be one and their consciousness mingle. I utter the same mantra with you all, ‘with you all equally I make the offering.”
 
“May your yearning be one, may your heart be one, may your mind be one, so that your union may be perfect. (Rig Veda X – 191-23)

(R.B. Sreekumar, Former Director General of Police, Gujarat)

The post Unholy and Unconstitutional: the ban of women from Sabarimala appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Toronto, June 18, 2015: the Muslim holy month of Ramzan has commenced. During this hot summer period, when the days are long, my wife Mahrukh will fast for nearly seventeen hours every day.

Annually, over the last two decades since we’ve been married, Ramzan is the time when I’m at once confounded by the rigidity of rituals and the beauty of belief. Having alternated between atheism and agnosticism for all of my adult life, I’ve always had a problem reconciling to practices borne out of faith. And through these years, Mahrukh has patiently but resolutely prevented me from interfering with what she believes her religion requires her to do.

The ritual of day-long fasting, I argue with her, was conceived and meant for places where day and night are almost equally divided, not for the summers of the northern hemisphere. Therefore, fasting for nearly two-thirds of a day for thirty days couldn’t possibly be what Allah ordained, it is quite unnecessary. Such arguments don’t move her; and if I persist, she glares at me with a finality that implies that if I know what’s good for me, I’d better shut up.

Even now, I cannot resist having that discussion with her at least once every year, before the Ramzan fasting begins. Over the years, however, I’ve noticed that my resistance has gradually transformed into tolerance and, as we age together, into acceptance.

She is pragmatic and doesn’t let her belief totally govern her life. So she prefers halal both at home and when eating out, but will also dine where halal is not served. She’d want to pray five times a day, but will be satisfied if she’s able todo it at least once, preferably at dawn. She has never worn a burqa, or a hijab, and finds the practice irrelevant to a woman’s existence. But she covers her head when she prays.

I have come to admire the rootedness and certitude that her belief gives her, and I often wonder whether these are the benefits of belief—solace, peace, and the ability to live in the moment, accept life for what it is.

I have come to admire the rootedness and certitude that her belief gives her, and I often wonder whether these are the benefit of belief—solace, peace, and the ability to live in the moment, accept life for what it is. I had seen this in my late grandmother Harvilas, a devout Hindu. Religion gave her a sense of self-assurance that was at once enviable and intimidating.
For the last two decades of her long life she lived in a predominantly Muslim milieu, with a masjid opposite our home, and the azaan flowing through the speakers five times a day. Adjusting rather remarkably to her new environment, Harvilas created an exclusive world of her own, looking for and perhaps finding inner peace in her puja.

For Mahrukh, religion is deeply personal, as it was for Harvilas, and the only external and physical manifestation of their belief is the ritual of prayer—the namaaz for Mahrukh and the puja for Harvilas. My lifelong disappointment has been that Harvilas died about a year before Mahrukh and I got married. They would have found many similarities between them, many experiences to share.

Rarely, if ever, does Mahrukh proclaim her belief to the world, but just as equally she never disguises or hides it. In many ways, and perhaps without realizing it, she has matured into a person who is a strange combination of her parents—mother Shakera and father Aga Vaqar. Growing up in cosmopolitan Bombay, she had friends who spoke different languages and had different beliefs. Her decision to get married to a non-Muslim didn’t overtly dismay her family perhaps because of her father’s distinctly Marxist views.

For Aga Vaqar, being a Muslim in India was not so much about faith as it was about identity. Despite our similar views on many aspects (or perhaps because of them) my relationship with him remained uneasy till he died. On the other hand, Mahrukh’s mother Shakera, who is a deeply religious person, has little in common with me; and yet on several occasions, she steadied our rocking marriage in the initial years, because of her affection for and trust in me. I don’t talk to her often, but merely knowing that she is there in this world makes me feel secure and gives me strength.

Living together has transformed both of us gradually, and as with all couples who live together, the process of adjustment has been fraught with friction. In the early years, I often thought that religion was instrumental in whatever problems we faced in our marriage, but over the years I’ve realized that what to outsiders may seem like an unending television soap opera of quarrels with all-too-brief interludes of togetherness is perhaps true of most marriages. Mahrukh and I don’t make any attempts to hide our differences. And yet we are together and will be together because we love each other, and because we want to be together.

Immigrating to Canada has made me more appreciative of my wife. We talk of assimilation for newcomers to Canada, and what has struck me about cultural assimilation is that while most of us would willingly change our lives to become part of the mainstream, the biggest challenge (at least for me) is adapting to a different cuisine. I have singularly failed in adapting to “Canadian” food, and prefer my vegetarian Gujarati diet. My rigid inability to adjust has made me appreciate Mahrukh’s sacrifice two decades ago when she came to live with me after our marriage. It must have been an immense challenge for her to leave behind her dietary habits, her lifestyle—which at many levels was so completely different from mine—and quickly and willingly adjust to a new life.

Mahrukh prepares Gujarati cuisine with consummate ease; every day, she packs my lunchbox with simple, basic Gujarati food. I can’t think of anyone who can quite make the karela nu shaak like she does. Her adadnidaal tastes exactly like my grandmother made, and she even attempts the saatpaadi (a Surati version of the bhakhri); her daal is almost as good as my mother’s. I have to constantly remind myself that she is not a Gujarati. Her transformation has been imperceptible, unannounced, and without any accompanying drama that is generally associated with such life-changing journeys.

Mahrukh’s vivacious personality helped her in gaining acceptance in my family, including extended members of the family, with most of whom I have maintained little or no connection. She is connected to them all or at least most of them on social media, and is my source of information for all that happens in my family. Also, given my generally depressing state of dispensation, she has also become the sole contact point for my immediate family (mother, sister) who are never quite sure how I would respond to their queries.

She has transformed me too, but gradually, and not in the manner that she’d have wanted. One of the biggest changes has been to acknowledge the relevance of religion.

She has transformed me too, but gradually, and not in the manner that she’d have wanted. One of the biggest changes has been to acknowledge the relevance of religion. My father was a lifelong socialist, influenced in equal measure by Jawaharlal Nehru (India’s first prime minister, a Fabian socialist) and Ram Manohar Lohia (a socialist leader), and had little patience with God or godliness. He absolutely refused to perform the janoi (the sacred thread) ceremony for me, much to my disappointment because all my cousins had great fun tonsuring their heads and putting on the sacred thread amidst the chanting of holy mantras. “The only use of a janoi is to circle it around your ear when you piss,” he said dismissively. My mother has turned religious as she has aged, but her religion encompasses all belief systems, she finds peace in the Siddhivinayak Mandir as much as in the Haji Ali dargah.

Once I outgrew my grandmother’s influence, I turned an agnostic and have remained so since. I called myself an atheist earlier but have stopped doing so; I don’t think I am (or was) an atheist, because I respect those who believe, even if I don’t share their beliefs, and I think that transformation has occurred because of Mahrukh’s influence on me. She has made me aware of religion’s many dimensions. I had grown up seeing my grandmother perform puja, and go to the mandir every day. I associated religion with older people. My wife’s religiosity began a process of questioning in me.

Why was a person who was not dissimilar to me in most ways be so completely different in one crucial aspect, and be so committed to a belief system? It led me to explore religion—not just Islam, but also Hinduism, Christianity, and other religions of India. It made me understand India and Indians better.

It made me more tolerant, better equipped to accept differences, develop an ability to find commonalities even with people who are completely different from me, and who preferred to revel in that difference.

And it has helped me better adjust to Canada’s multicultural society. When our son was born, we agreed to name him Che, after the Argentinian revolutionary. It was a momentous event in our lives, and even though I have never been a diarist, I recorded it. This is what I wrote then:

When he will ask me why I named him Che:

Monday, September 8, 1997, 21.48 hrs: A baby boy is born to Mahrukh. And my world has changed. This is my single biggest achievement. The 7 lbs baby will be called Che, after Ernesto Che Guevara, the Argentine revolutionary, who fought alongside Fidel Castro in Cuba (and who was killed in Bolivia). His remains were found earlier this year. Che Guevara is the only revolutionary of this century who, after having succeeded in ushering in a new order in a country, did not sit down permanently to rule the country. He went on fighting in other countries for the cause which he felt was right. Che essentially means “my”. But it is not just that. “For the residents of the pampas, Che can express, depending on intonation and context, the entire spectrum of human passions—surprise, exhilaration, sorrow, tenderness, approval or protest” (quoted from Ernesto Che Guevara, a biography by I Lavretsky)… I know Meghnad (my father, who died about four months before my son was born) would have liked the name, Durga (my mother) will, too, and Mahrukh has begun to like the name (though I suspect this has more to do with her fear that her son may otherwise be named with a Sanskrit word). More importantly, if I succeed in making him a decent human being, I am sure, even my son will like his name.

Che was conceived just before the month of Ramzan in 1997 (I think it was during a trip to Aurangabad in December 1996) and was born during the Ganapati festival of 1997. The nurses at the Holy Family Hospital, Bandra, told us that September 8 was also the feast of the Virgin Mary. Che’s date of birth also coincided with the holy month of the Jains—Paryushan.

Fairly early on, I decided that I would not decide what religion my son would follow. It wasn’t a tough decision for me. It may have been a bit challenging for Mahrukh, but even she has never made any overt attempts to force her views on him.

Fairly early on, I decided that I would not decide what religion my son would follow. It wasn’t a tough decision for me. It may have been a bit challenging for Mahrukh, but even she has never made any overt attempts to force her views on him. One of the reasons for our decision to immigrate to Canada was to make it possible for Che to grow up in a society where his identity would not be restricted merely to his religion. I believe that Canadian society is generally open and fair, and doesn’t judge a person by his or her faith, although many recent events have severely challenged this belief.

Over the last eighteen years, I have consciously avoided influencing my son’s mind, and not merely about religion, but even about other matters. I believe that a child is influenced by what he sees his elders do rather than what his elders tell him to do. I realize that because of his mother’s faith, my son is more exposed to it. It was my experience, too, growing up in a household where though my parents weren’t religious my grandmother’s religiosity influenced me especially during my adolescence. But I quickly abandoned the narrow confines of religion once I was exposed to different experiences.

What helped was the multi-faith milieu of Teli Gali, a narrow lane in Andheri, where I grew up. My friends and neighbours belonged to different religions, different castes; we happily celebrated all festivals, and participated in rituals of all faiths. Opposite my home to the south was a masjid, and to the north a Swaminarayan mandir; a church, another Ganapati mandir, four movie studios, and eight cinemas were within walking distance. Tell Gali made me who I am today.

In the same way, I’m sure Canadian multiculturalism will help Che develop his own ideas about himself, his identity, and his place in the world.

As a family, we don’t often discuss these matters. But much to my consternation, I have realised that it is a major concern for the people we know, and often even for people we don’t know. Everyone wants to know if religion is a source of friction between Mahrukh and me, and I joke that we have many other important reasons to quarrel. People want to know if it would become a cause for friction if Che were to decide one way or the other, and I’m at pains to explain that it wouldn’t really matter, and that why should he have just two options—he could choose from many that are available, or like most rational human beings these days, choose none.

I remember one particular incident that rankles even after many years. In my struggle to find a proper job after I came to this country in 2008 (at the ripe age of 46), and upon realizing that finding one was next to impossible, I enrolled in a short program in flash animation at the Yorkdale Adult Education Centre in Toronto. I also wrote a column for Canadian Immigrant, and wrote about this experience. I want to share this here because it is the sort of response that I regularly encounter, and which I find extremely annoying.

In the column titled Questions of Identity, I wrote,

Once, while I was waiting in the corridor for the class to commence, two of my classmates also arrived. They were immigrants, too, but they were in Canada for more than two decades. After a brief discussion about our course, the subject veered to our children.

“I have one son: I said, “He’s 12 and he would be able to do this course better than me.”

Both the women nodded their heads in agreement. To become a student when you’re middle-aged poses peculiar challenges. One of the two women was a Tamil from Sri Lanka and had come to Toronto soon after she completed her education in Madurai (India) in 1988. The other woman was from Somalia and had come to Toronto in 1986.

The Tamil woman has two sons—the elder is 17 and the younger 13; the Somali woman’s elder daughter is 18 and she has two other children aged 6 and 4.

I have often wondered why is it that we have a tendency to know the other person’s faith and religion. I can live with ethnicity. But questions about my religion are something that I find deeply disturbing; not because I feel defensive answering them, but because I know my answers disturb the people who ask them. The Tamil woman wanted to know my country of origin.

“India,” I replied. She asked, “Are you a Hindu?”

“By birth,” I said. “I’m also a Hindu,” she said.

I nodded.

“You pray to Krishna?” she asked again.

“I don’t pray at all,” I said, and quickly added, “But I respect those who do.”

“Your wife also doesn’t pray?” she asked.

“My wife is a Muslim,” I answered.

The woman from Sri Lanka looked at me with a sense of disquiet. But the Somali woman perked up.

“Your wife is a Muslim?” she asked.

“Yes.”

“She prays five times a day?”

“Not five times, but at least once early morning,” I said.

“I can’t get up early every morning,” the Somali woman sighed, and then added with unconcealed pride, “But my elder daughter does.”

In five minutes of conversation we had discovered not what united us—our visible minority status and our lower-income status—but what differentiated us. We weren’t three immigrants in Toronto. We were now a Muslim, a Hindu and an agnostic.
In five minutes of conversation we had discovered not what united us—our visible minority status and our lower-income status—but what differentiated us. We weren’t three immigrants in Toronto. We were now a Muslim, a Hindu and an agnostic.

“Didn’t your parents object (to your marriage)?” the Tamil woman asked.

“No” I said.

“Even your wife’s parents?” the Somali woman asked.

“Not really,” I said.

“What religion will your son practice?” the Somali woman asked.

“I don’t know,” I said, “I’d rather that he decides what he wants to be when he is mature enough to take such decisions on his own.”

“Have you given him a Hindu name or a Muslim name?” the Tamil woman asked.

“Neither. I’ve named him Che. It means ‘my.’ ”

I don’t want to create the impression that my wife and I don’t have differences. We differ on many issues, and constantly. The Charlie Hebdo massacre was a recent instance when we had different views; the annual memorial in New York for the victims of 9/11 is another. I’ve learned—sometimes with great difficulty—to accept as valid those of her opinions that are diametrically different from mine; and she has acquired the confidence to express her views without the fear of being labelled. We understand that we can express our views to each other and be understood even when the other person does not share our opinion.
 

 
Originally published in ‘The Relevance of Islamic Identity in Canada: Culture, Politics and Self’. Edited by Nurjehan Aziz, Published by Mawenzi House Publishers Ltd. Toronto Canada (2015). Republished with the publisher’s permission.

Mayank Bhatt is a Toronto-based author. His debut novel, Belief was published in 2016.
 

The post Married to a believer appeared first on SabrangIndia.

What is at stake is not just Muslim Personal Law but all laws governing marriage and divorce, including Hindu Law.

The importance of Shayara’s case for women of all communities

While there has been a state of near hysteria over the issue of triple talaq in the media, no one is clear on the real importance of the case. While the media is flooded with stories of husbands giving unilateral talaq to their wives on the phone and by SMS, no one talks about the fact that women of all religious communities face domestic violence and that women are abandoned without notice. The fact is that inequality in what has come to be known as personal laws exists across all religious communities. Not a single law of any community or tribe is immune from the charge that it violates fundamental rights of women to equality. Agricultural land in many states notoriously is often not held by the daughters of the community.

We have only recently seen an agitation in Nagaland for the inclusion of women in municipal councils that failed. The demand was resisted on the ground that legislation could not interfere with tribal customs.

The Supreme Court in Madhu Kishwar & Ors v. State Of Bihar & Ors (1996 SCC 5 125) when confronted with the issue of whether tribal customs could be challenged on the ground that they violated fundamental rights dodged the issue by stating that: “For in whatever measure be the concern of the court, it compulsively needs to apply, somewhere and at sometime, brakes to its self-motion, described in judicial parlance as self-restraint…under the circumstances it is not desirable to declare the customs of tribal
inhabitants as offending Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution…”

Similarly in Githa Hariharan v. Reserve Bank of India (AIR 1999 SC 1149), the Supreme Court was asked to strike down Section 6 (a) of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956. The court refused to do so and preferred instead to “read down” a blatantly discriminatory law that said that the father is the natural guardian of the children and it is after the death of the father that a mother becomes the natural guardian. The Supreme Court interpreted the provision to mean that in the absence of the father or when the father was not in charge of the affairs of the minor either due to an agreement between the two parents or if the father for any reason was not able to take care of the child, the mother would be the natural guardian even during the lifetime of the father. Personal laws have become an island within the Indian Constitution immune from any challenge on the ground that they violate the right to equality of women.

In the triple talaq case the Supreme Court is confronted with this question yet again and it remains to be seen if they will decide the question or dodge it by saying that Islam itself does not recognize triple talaq and hence, there is no need to decide the larger issue of whether personal laws are amenable to constitutional checks and challenges. What is at stake is not just Muslim Personal Law but all laws governing marriage and divorce, including Hindu Law. Will the ruling party that is moving towards a Hindutva State, allow such a challenge is the question. For now the Union of India has committed itself to the challenge but may remain content with the striking down on the ground that it is un-Islamic as some groups have argued. There is a lot riding on this case, not just talaq. The issues are fundamental to constitutional gender justice for all women.
 
Impact of Triple Talaq
The undisputable impact of triple talaq is that it alters the civil status of a married woman in a unilateral manner, as it is the husband who pronounces a woman financially unstable if she is solely dependent on her husband’s income and is primarily responsible for the household chores. Such a woman may be driven to claim maintenance if the mehr (amount of monetary security usually determined at the time of marriage which is given to a Muslim woman at the time of divorce) she receives is nominal which most often it is. She may have to engage in legal battles for the custody of her children. It is ironic that the supporters of triple talaq claim that triple talaq cannot be a subject for adjudication before courts of law and shall continue to remain extra-judicial, but fail to notice that the consequences following triple talaq are adjudicated before courts of law.
 
Stand of the Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind
Legitimate claims, of violation of fundamental rights to equality, life and dignity of Shayara Bano and of several other women like Inayat and Tamana who have been thrown out of their matrimonial homes, left financially unstable, and cut off from seeing their children by means of triple talaq who are being represented through a collective voice of Bebaak Collective, are receiving backlash from conservative groups such as the Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind for taking the matter to court who are of the opinion that – “Part III of the Constitution does not touch upon the personal laws of the parties and therefore their constitutional validity cannot be questioned.”
 
Stand of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board
The All India Muslim Personal Law Board represented by Senior Advocates Kapil Sibal and Raju Ramchandran and several others reacted on similar lines taking the stand that– “(Muslim) personal laws cannot be challenged by the reason of fundamental rights” cautioning the Supreme Court not to interfere in the personal affairs of the Muslim community. The All India Muslim Personal Law Board in its written submissions to court states that: “it is clear that though pronouncement of talaq thrice at one go is undesirable but in view of the aforesaid verse of the Holy Quran, it is clear that three pronouncements, howsoever they may be made result in valid dissolution of marriage.”
 
Law Commission of India on a UCC & UP State Elections
Apart from responses and counter responses of parties to the court case, during the pendency of the matter before the Supreme Court of India, we also saw orchestrated debates on electronic media “liberate Muslim women” and no less than the Law Commission of India issued a questionnaire asking for Yes/No answers to the question “Are you aware that Article 44 of the Constitution of India provides that the State shall endeavor to secure for the citizens a Uniform Civil Code throughout the territory of India? Do you agree that the existing personal laws and customary practices need codification and would benefit the people?” In a well written letter some of us from the women’s movement asked the Law Commission of India to give us a draft of the so called code before we could answer the question, elementary to say the least.
Then came several election promises made by the BJP in Uttar Pradesh that they would end the practice of triple talaq and after the results we were told that Muslim women voted for the BJP as they wanted an end to triple talaq. It remains a mystery how the secret ballot cast by women became part of political propaganda.

Is the insistence on saptapadi (seven steps around the holy fire) among Hindus for a valid marriage being abolished by a Uniform Civil Code? Does polygamy exist only among Muslims or is there de facto polygamy among Hindus as well? Will marriage among all communities be secularized and be truly considered as “a civil union” and “a partnership of equals, and no longer one in which the wife must be the subservient” as suggested by the Verma Committee or are we focused only on the abolition of triple talaq among Muslims? If the latter is the case, the political agenda behind the government championing the cause of Muslim women falls under doubt.

This is not to suggest that formal inequality can continue to exist under the Indian Constitution but rather that all forms of inequality formal or de facto in all communities must be abolished. The fact is that Hindu Law contains the remnants of Manu’s Laws (an ancient sacred legal text followed by Hindus) and that too must change.
 
Bebaak Collective’s stand in distinction to the Union’s stand
Bebaak Collective issued a statement putting the issue squarely in a secular context against the stand of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board responding as follows:
“First, whether the practice of unilateral triple talaq is validated by religion or not is not our contention, rather it is gender discriminatory and epitomises patriarchal values and therefore must be abolished should be emphasized. Second, the belief that women lack decision making qualities dilutes the citizenship rights of Muslim women in India who have been exercising their electoral rights for more than sixty years now…It is no surprise that All India Muslim Personal Board has not progressed over the decades and reiterates the same position which reverberates the patriarchal conservative ideas of the community. However, we envision a gender just law for the community where women’s question of social security and rights promised by the Indian Constitution will be practised.”

Organizations like Bebaak Collective distinguish themselves from the ruling party in that they articulate the voice of secular Muslim women. They demand not just an end to triple talaq but also social welfare schemes for destitute women. We all know of the notorious problems with Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 and the difficulty of recovering any money form a disappearing husband even when an order is passed for maintenance. Bebaak Collective demands better living conditions, the right to secular education and other benefits from the State for all women. Relief form triple talaq alone will not solve the problem, they want to negotiate for a more equal space for all women within the marriage, they demand and end to domestic violence.

Hasina Khan, founder of Bebaak Collective is of the view that:
“None of the personal laws are gender just. Even Muslim personal law is discriminatory and does not provide equal status to women. Muslim women are doubly oppressed; they witness violence of different forms. State must provide social security to Muslim women who are survivors of any form of violence and discriminations. The State must protect their right to livelihood and also provide community centers, compensations, stipend, library centers, legal aid or counseling sessions to help them with sustenance of their life. The State must provide job opportunities and all kinds of support including working women’s hostel, shelter homes and specialized skills which have market demand to the young women across all communities who can carry forward their life with dignity and independence…We have felt the need to focus on four key issues a) Right to Citizenship and equality, b) Social security, c) Emerging Right wing forces and d) Implementation of Sachar Committee Report… It is seen that a woman has lesser social security irrespective of her community or religious status, we must demand for all of them having emphasis on Muslim women….”

They argue that all personal laws are capable of being challenged on the ground that they violate fundamental rights regardless of whether they are based on religion or custom, are codified or un-codified.

Article 13 of the Indian Constitution states that “all laws in force” in the territory of India immediately before the commencement of this Constitution, in so far as they are inconsistent with the provisions of this Part, shall, to the extent of such inconsistency, be void and the State shall not make any “law” which takes away or abridges the rights conferred by this Part and any law made in contravention of this clause shall, to the extent of the contravention, be void. Article 13 (3) defines the expression “law” to “include(s) any ordinance, order, bye-law, rule, regulation, notification, custom or usage having in the territory of India the force of law” and the expression “laws in force” to “include(s) laws passed or made by a Legislature or other competent authority in the territory of India before the commencement of this Constitution and not previously repealed, notwithstanding that any such law or any part thereof may not be then in operation either at all or in particular areas.”

Bebaak Collective and CSS argue that all personal laws are “laws in force” and must meet the challenge of Article 13. The system of personal laws originated in British India prior to the enactment of the Indian Constitution. Right from Warren Hastings Plan of 1772, Maulvis and Pandits (religious priests) were assisting and advising the courts on disputes governed by Muslim and Hindu Laws. While today priests no longer advise the courts, the system of governing people of different religions by different laws continues till today.

The basic defining feature of any law is that it is binding on citizens and is recognized by the State as law and enforceable by the State. Personal laws are binding on citizens and even today are recognized and enforced by the State. The State has explicitly recognized personal laws in form of legislations for example, Muslim personal laws have been provided recognition through the Muslim Personal Laws (Shariat) Application Act 1937 and Hindu personal laws through various legislations such as Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Hindu Succession Act 1956, the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act 1956, the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act 1956.

There is therefore no basis for the demand that the Supreme Court exercise judicial restraint in Shayara Bano’s petition.

The Bombay High Court vide a two-judge bench in the case of State of Bombay v. Narasu Appa Mali (AIR 1952 Bom 84) way back in 1952 while upholding the constitutional validity of Bombay Prevention of Hindu Bigamous Marriages Act, 1946 made an observation that the expression “personal law” has not been used in Article 13 and therefore the framers wanted to leave them outside the purview of Part III Fundamental Rights of the Constitution. Later, the Supreme Court in Krishna Singh v. Mathura Ahir (1981 3 SCC 689) while dealing with a case of succession rights of a mahant (ascetic) said: “Part III of the Constitution does not touch upon the personal laws of the parties”. This erroneous decision of 1952 is what the All India Muslim Personal Law Board relies on. Several learned authors have pointed out that no reasons have been provided for this observation made by the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court. Moreover, in a subsequent judgment of C. Masilamani Mudaliar v. Idol of Sri Swaminathaswami (1996 8 SCC 525) the Supreme Court has held: “Personal laws are derived not from the Constitution but from the religious scriptures. The laws thus derived must be consistent with the Constitution lest they become void under Art. 13 if they violate fundamental rights”.
 
Stand of Bhartiya Muslim Mahila Andolan (BMMA)
BMMA has taken the view that after the Delhi High Court case of Masroor Ahmed v. State (2008 103 DRJ 137), talaq-e-bidat/instantaneous triple talaq “has lost its instantaneous nature, as also its irrevocable nature. Thus, even when instantaneous talaq is pronounced it will not immediately effect divorce…courts in India have by a purely interpretative exercise held that talaq-e-bidat or instantaneous talaq is illegal and ineffective. If the same declaration is given by this Hon’ble Court by a process of interpretation of personal law, then the question of going into the constitutionality of personal law does not arise. In the matters pending before this Hon’ble Court in none of the cases the facts comprise of anything other than women being aggrieved by instantaneous talaq and therefore those issues are also academic.”
They argue for a minimalistic approach and request that the constitutional issue of whether personal laws are amenable to challenge and checks in courts not be decided.
 
Stand of the Union
The Union in its affidavit to the court seems to be supporting Shayara Bano’s petition when it states that “It is extremely significant to note that a large number of Muslim countries or countries with an overwhelmingly large Muslim population where Islam is the State religion, have undertaken reforms in this area and have regulated divorce law and polygamy”. But women’s groups are skeptical of a hidden Uniform Civil Code agenda that may be forming the basis of such support. In February before the U.P State elections, the Law Minister made a statement that “The government may take a major step to ban triple talaq.” No such step has been taken, instead the ball has been thrown into the Supreme Court and the Suprme Court itsef has chosen to give this case a priority hearing on the ground that “the rights of many persons will be affected”.
 
The real significance of the case: Are personal laws, regardless of which community, immune from constitutional challenge ?
The broader constitutional issue of importance is whether unlike any other laws that are amenable to constitutional challenge for being violative of rights to equality and dignity, are personal laws – be it of Hindus, Muslims, Parsis or Christians – immune from constitutional checks and can they continue to be practiced despite being discriminatory, patriarchal and against fundamental rights of women or any other person for that sake?
 
What Stand will the Supreme Court of India take ?
Shayara Bano’s petition has now been listed to be heard by a constitutional bench of five judges during the Supreme Court vacations in May. The reason being that the Chief Justice believes that “the matter is of substantial importance” and deserves undivided attention of the court. Only time will tell if the Supreme Court chooses to overrule the Narsu Appa Mali and Krishna Singh cases or chooses to exercise judicial restraint declaring instead that triple talaq in the form in which it is practiced is un Islamic leaving undecided whether personal laws can be challenged. If they do decide that personal laws can be challenged, it will have far reaching consequences for all women regardless of the religion they belong to and advance the goal of gender justice for all.
 
Courtesy: Indian Cultural Forum
 

The post Personal Laws of All Faiths Violate Principles of Gender Equality, Why then the Sole Focus Only on Triple Talaq? appeared first on SabrangIndia.