He rode camels because they were available

He ate dates because they grew around him

He used Arabic because it was his mother tongue

He covered his head because the sun demanded it.

He used miswak because toothbrushes hadn’t been invented.

He used kohl (surma) because it was a protection against desert sun and sand.

The desert terrain was hot, rough, and full of dust, dirt, and animal waste. He wore his lower garments above the ankles for hygiene, mobility, and durability, not as a divine dress code.

These were tools of his time, not eternal truths

But somehow today, we turn them into markers of piety as if Islam is a costume, not a conscience. Following the Prophet’s Arabian culture is NOT Sunnah.

No my dear Muslim friends. No.

A Muslim in a white thawb is seen as more religious than one in dhoti or any traditional dress

A woman in black abaya is called modest, but one in a saree or jeans with dignity is questioned

A child who learns Arabic alphabets is praised — even if he doesn’t understand them, but a child who reads Quran in Hindi is advised to learn how to read in Arabic.

What are we preserving – faith or performance?

We live in India. Not in tribal Quraysh.Not in the sands of Najd.

But in a country of poetry, diversity, art, and ancient spirituality. We live among Sikhs who believe in service, Hindus who light lamps for love, Jains who preach nonviolence, and Buddhists who renounce hatred.

And instead of growing with that beauty – we fear becoming “less Muslim” or  if we smile during Holi, or greet a neighbour on Diwali, or say – merry Christmas, or light a diya in remembrance, or visit a Gurdwara to pay respect.

Why is your Islam so weak it breaks with kindness?

The Prophet taught mercy, truth, and wisdom.Not brand loyalty to the Arabian Peninsula.

If Islam was meant to be Arab-only, it would’ve stayed there. But it travelled. It adapted.

It bloomed in Persia, Africa, Indonesia, and yes even India.

So why are we now trying to reverse it into cultural regression, when the message was meant to transcend culture?

You can be deeply Muslim and proudly Indian.

You can pray in Arabic and speak in Tamil, Hindi, English, Sanskrit. You can use Chandan, Jasmine, not Oudh necessarily

You can fast in Ramadan and share sweets on Diwali.

You can follow the Sunnah and wear a saree.

You can love the Quran and still find peace in Kabir’s dohas, in Rahim’s couplets, in Amir Khusrau’s verses

You follow Muhammad and still love Guru Nanak. You can listen to Hadith and still listen to Ramayana or read Guru Granth Sahib.

This isn’t syncretism. This is the soul of Indian Islam – a soul that once healed, harmonized, and humbled. Islam doesn’t demand imitation. It demands intention.

You have made culture your qibla, not truth. The Prophet didn’t teach us to erase our identity

He taught us to elevate it with integrity, not imitation.

So yes – you can be deeply Muslim and unapologetically Indian. You are still stronger because you allow your faith to coexist with diversity – the beauty of our country!!

Posted by Munaz Anjum on his Facebook

(https://www.facebook.com/share/p/18f76Liet1/)

The post Not everything the Prophet practiced was religion  appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Intolerance of all forms hits academic: On January 9, 2023 the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) has condemned the “firing of an art professor, Erika López Prater, from Hamline University on the grounds of showing a fourteenth-century painting depicting the Prophet Muḥammad.” The statement is not just a statement of support for the professor but also urges the university to reverse its decision and to take compensatory action to ameliorate the situation.

News sources report that the matter reached the university administration after a Muslim student complained to them about the professor showing the image in class. Subsequently, undergraduate students at the university received an email from the administration declaring the incident to be “undeniably inconsiderate, disrespectful and Islamophobic.” Because the professor was hired as an adjunct, her contract was not renewed and she was effectively fired.

The MPAC states, that as a “Muslim organization, we recognize the validity and ubiquity of an Islamic viewpoint that discourages or forbids any depictions of the Prophet, especially if done in a distasteful or disrespectful manner. However, we also recognize the historical reality that other viewpoints have existed and that there have been some Muslims, including and especially Shīʿī Muslims,  who have felt no qualms in pictorially representing the Prophet (although often veiling his face out of respect). All this is a testament to the great internal diversity within the Islamic tradition, which should be celebrated.” 

Ironically, this, it seems, was the exact point that Dr. Prater was trying to convey to her students. She empathetically prepared them in advance for the image, which was part of an optional exercise and prefaced with a content warning. “I am showing you this image for a reason,” stressed the professor:

“There is this common thinking that Islam completely forbids, outright, any figurative depictions or any depictions of holy personages. While many Islamic cultures do strongly frown on this practice, I would like to remind you there is no one, monothetic Islamic culture”—Dr Prater.

The statement is categoric- “The painting was not Islamophobic. In fact, it was commissioned by a fourteenth-century Muslim king in order to honour the Prophet, depicting the first Quranic revelation from the angel Gabriel. 

“Even if it is the case that many Muslims feel uncomfortable with such depictions, Dr. Prater was trying to emphasise a key principle of religious literacy: religions are not monolithic in nature, but rather, internally diverse. This principle should be appreciated in order to combat Islamophobia, which is often premised on flattening out Islam and viewing the Islamic tradition in an essentialist and reductionist manner. The professor should be thanked for her role in educating students, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, and for doing so in a critically empathetic manner. 

The statement further adds, “ In a time of rampant Islamophobia, highly offensive and racialized images of the Prophet Muḥammad abound on the internet and on social media. We consider these images to be inappropriate and not dissimilar to “black face” or Anti-Semitic cartoons; even if such images and their makers are protected by law, social opprobrium is due to them by all those who are reasonable and decent. As Muslims, of course, we must respond in a calm and graceful manner as befits our religion: 

“The servants of the Compassionate are those who walk humbly upon the earth, and when the ignorant address them [with insulting words], they respond, ‘peace.’

(Q 25:63)

“Given the ubiquity of Islamophobic depictions of the Prophet Muḥammad, it hardly makes sense to target an art professor trying to combat narrow understandings of Islam. There is an unmistakable irony in the situation, which should be appreciated. Additionally, misusing the label “Islamophobia” has the negative effect of watering down the term and rendering it less effective in calling out actual acts of bigotry.

“Finally, we stress the importance of education in the Islamic tradition. On the basis of our shared Islamic and universal values, we affirm the need to instill a spirit of free inquiry, critical thinking, and viewpoint diversity in the university setting.

Related:

Statement of Support for Art Professor Fired from Hamline University

A Lecturer Showed a Painting of the Prophet Muhammad. She Lost Her Job.

The post Firing of art professor for showing a 14-century painting of Prophet Muhammad condemned: MPAC appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Indian government finds itself in a diplomatic crisis following offensive remarks by the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) spokesperson, Nupur Sharma, on national television about the Prophet Muhammad and his wife, Aisha. The BJP has suspended Sharma from the position, but that has not been enough to quell the crisis. Over a dozen Muslim countries, including Pakistan, Iran and Saudi Arabia, have condemned the Indian government and asked for a public apology.

This is just another incident of hate speech against Muslims, which has been rising in India since the Prime Minister Narendra Modi-led BJP government came to power in 2014. The government has been criticized for several lynchings of Muslims by Hindu mobs with police indifference and judicial apathy over the past years. In 2019, the BJP passed a new citizenship law that discriminated against Muslims, and its Islamophobic attitudes recently encouraged some schools and colleges to impose a headscarf ban on students.

These discriminatory policies have a global significance because India has the world’s third-largest Muslim population, after Indonesia and Pakistan. Out of the estimated Indian population of 1.4 billion, about 210 million – 15% – are Muslim.

As a Muslim, I am aware of the deep reverence for Prophet Muhammad, and I understand Muslim individuals’ resentment. The reaction of Muslim governments, however, reflect their political regimes. As my book “Islam, Authoritarianism, and Underdevelopment” explains, most Muslim governments are authoritarian and concentrate on condemning sacrilege against Islam – more than advocating to protect the rights of Muslim minorities abroad.
 

Aisha: a powerful woman

The recent Indian case focused on Aisha’s age when she married the Prophet. Aisha is one of the most important, vigorous and powerful figures in Islamic history. The favorite wife of the Prophet, she was the daughter of the Prophet’s successor and closest friend, Abu Bakr. She became a leading narrator of hadith – the records of the Prophet’s words and actions – the teacher of many scholars and a military leader in a civil war.

According to a hadith record, Aisha was 9 years old when she got married. Some Muslims accept this record and see it normal for a pre-modern marriage, whereas other Muslims believe that Aisha was either 18 or 19 years old by referring to other records.

It is not possible to know the true facts of Aisha’s age. As Islamic scholar Khaled Abou El Fadl stresses, “we do not know and will never know” them. Sharma thus used a single narration, while ignoring alternative Muslim explanations, in her remarks.
 

Prioritizing blasphemy, not human rights

This is not the first time that Muslim governments have reacted to defamatory actions against the Prophet. The long list of incidents includes Iran’s Supreme Leader Ruhollah Khomeini’s 1989 call on Muslims to kill novelist Salman Rushdie and the 2006 boycott of Danish products throughout the Middle East in reaction to a dozen cartoons published in a newspaper.

An interesting pattern is visible in Muslim governments’ attitudes: They are very vocal when it comes to the cases of verbal or artistic attacks on Islamic values, whereas they are generally silent about human rights violations against Muslim individuals.

Muslim individuals in India have complained about the violations of their rights for almost a decade, but Muslim governments did not show a noteworthy reaction to the BJP until this defamation incident.

Another example is China, which has been persecuting 12 million Uyghur Muslims for many years. No Muslim government showed any major reaction. Instead, these governments have focused on their material interests and disregarded how the Chinese state treats its Muslim minority.

This double standard can be explained by the widespread authoritarianism in the Muslim world. Out of 50 Muslim countries, only five are democratic. Most authoritarian governments in the Muslim world have blasphemy laws that punish sacrilegious statements and suppress dissenting voices. That these governments should demand the punishment of blasphemy and defamation from India or other non-Muslim countries follows from these policies.

Another characteristic of authoritarian Muslim governments is their own violations of the rights of religious and ethnic minorities. In Pakistan, these violations have targeted the Ahmadiyya, Shia, Hindu and some other religious communities, while in Iran, ethnic minorities, including Azerbaijani Turks, Baluchis and Kurds, faced discrimination in education and employment. A rights-based discourse abroad, therefore, would contradict these governments’ policies at home.

Authoritarianism in the Muslim world has tragic consequences for Muslim minorities in India and elsewhere. Muslim governments’ short-term, emotional reactions to some defamation cases do not help improve the conditions of Muslim minorities, who actually need a more consistent and principled support.

Author is Professor of Political Science, San Diego State University

This article was first published on The Conversation

The post Why Muslim countries are quick at condemning defamation – but often ignore rights violations against Muslim minorities appeared first on SabrangIndia.

By June 12, 2022 morning, the Uttar Pradesh police arrested at least 325 people in 13 FIRs relating to the Friday protests that condemned the hate speech spewed by suspended BJP leader Nupur Sharma. By 8 AM on Sunday, Prayagraj (Allahabad) recorded the highest number of arrests of 91 people.

What sparked the arrest?

On June 10 afternoon, huge protests by Muslims broke out in at least 16 cities of India. This included the national capital Delhi, along with Srinagar, Lucknow, Prayagraj (Allahabad), Sahranpur, Firozabad, Hyderabad, Ranchi, Kolkata-Howrah and Panvel among others. Protesters unitedly called for Sharma’s arrest after she made derogatory remarks about Prophet Mohammad and Islam during a Times Now debate on May 26.

Uninterrupted by the news anchor Navika Kumar, Sharma went on to utter anti-Islam slurs. It wasn’t until June 5 that Sharma was suspended after massive outrage from Gulf countries. On May 28, the Mumbai police also registered an FIR against her. Nonetheless, India’s Muslim community gathered in huge crowds to condemn her remarks as well as that of recently-expelled BJP leader Naveen Kumar Jindal.

While some protests ended peacefully with people dispersing within half an hour of the demonstration, many places in Uttar Pradesh and other states reported conflict between the police and protesters. While some areas reported stray incidents of stone-pelting by the people, other areas said the police resorted to lathi-charge and tear gassing. Overall, 91 people were arrested in Prayagraj, 71 people were arrested in Saharanpur, 51 people were arrested in Hathras, 34 people were arrested in Moradabad, 15 people were arrested in Ferozabad and 34 people were arrested in Ambedkar Nagar.

The former two areas filed three FIRs each while the rest reported one FIR in each district.

By Monday morning, one person in Prayagraj Moradabad and Ferozabad each was arrested, nine people arrested in Saharanpur and seven people were arrested in Ambedkar Nagar. Moreover, six people were arrested in Aligarh and four people were arrested in Jalaun, said Hindustan Times.

Police accuse protesters

In Prayagraj, one FIR listed as many as 11 named and over 250 unnamed people. These people were charged for rioting, unlawful assembly, promoting religious hatred, attempted murder, hurting a police officer, mischief by explosive or fire, criminal intimidation, among other IPC charges. Further they were charges for possessing an explosive and trying to detonate it under Explosive Substances Act among other acts.

As per the report, protesters suddenly appeared at the Shaukat Ali Tiraha after jumma namaz (Friday prayers). The police (in the FIR) termed protesters as miscreants and alleged that they were armed with bombs and stones and refused to listen to the police’s requests to maintain peace.

The FIR also claimed that the protesters allegedly threatened and abused the police and burned a nearby motorcycle. When reinforcements arrived, the police used tear-gas shells, lathi charged people and fired gun shots.

“Under a well-planned conspiracy, minor children were also brought in by instigating. These minor children were also supporting the miscreants,” said the police report.

Further, Economic Times on Sunday reported 100 arrests in Howrah and Murshidabad districts of West Bengal. A prohibitory order was also enforced in the districts. In Jharkhand, the Ranchi police registered 25 FIRs against ‘thousands’ of people after clashes that resulted in two deaths and injuries to scores of people. This is the same city where a clueless Muslim youth was attacked by the police solely for standing in the protest area.

Demolitions in the background

However, near simultaneous with these arrests, came the demolition notices to various families whose members participated in this and earlier protests in the state. As per a notice sent out by the Prayagraj administration to local activist Javed Mohammad, authorities intended to demolish encroaching houses in Kareli by June 12. However, on June 9 night, the police detained Javed. Then his wife and younger daughter were detained without warrant, that too after sunset. These are family members of the anti-CAA activisit Afreen Fatima who was active in 2019-2020.

A day before this, the Hindustan Times reported that Kanpur and Saharanpur authorities also demolished homes of those accused in the Friday protests. Such demolitions have become a regular form of state-sponsored force especially since the illegal demolitions in Khargone Madhya Pradesh (April 2022). A house built under the PM Awas Yojana was also destroyed at the time. Over time, this incident was succeeded by demolitions in Delhi, Assam and Bengaluru. In all these areas, the communities targeted were Muslim communities.

Earlier, Sabrang India has reported how Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath (Ajay Bisht) received the title ‘Bulldozer Baba’ for authorising demolition of homes and properties of people who were dubbed as either criminals or members of the mafia. In fact, his 2022 election was won on slogans of reprisal justice and the victory procession in Lucknow saw JCB bulldozers being paraded through the streets of the state capital of Lucknow. Before 2022, this abuse of demolition work can be traced to the anti-Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) protests in 2019 during which detention, arrests, beating up and then attaching properties of “accused” was undertaken, almost unquestioned by the state’s administration.

Adityanath had referred to the heavy machinery in multiple speeches during elections and took out bulldozer rallies after winning on March 10, 2022.

Related:

Spontaneous pan-India protests against Nupur Sharma

Ranchi: 2 dead and Muslim boy terrorised for Friday protests

Right-wing calls Ranchi boy’s ordeal a “victim card” tactic

Evolution of Bulldozer Injustice

The post Friday protests: At least 325 arrests in UP alone! appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Widespread media reports show that the Al-Qaeda in Indian Subcontinent or AQIS has issued a letter warning of attacks in Indian cities in the aftermath of Bharatiya Janata Party leaders’ comments against Prophet Mohammed, reports have said.The Hindu has reported that the purported statement calls for attacks in Delhi, Mumbai, Uttar Pradesh and Gujarat.Indian Express has reported that central intelligence agencies are on alert after the warning and the states have been notified of the threat.

On June 5, Bharatiya Janata Party suspended national spokesperson Nupur Sharma and expelled Delhi media unit head Naveen Jindal after unprecedented diplomatic backlash from Muslim countries.

“In response to this affront, the hearts of Muslims all over the world are bleeding and are filled with feelings of revenge and retribution,” the statement, issued on Monday, June 6, has said. AQIS, launched in 2014, has, in the past, carried out attacks in Bangladesh, especially against secular writers and bloggers, the Hindu report mentions.

Related:

A fitting reply to Al Qaeda chief: Muskan’s father
We Indian Muslims need no sermons from the Al-Qaeda
टाइम्स नाउ पर डिबेट में नूपुर शर्मा ने पैग़म्बर मुहम्मद पर की आपत्तिजनक टिप्पणी, ट्रोल हुईं
After Times Now debate Nupur Sharma gets online threats from trolls 
Student leader, Abdul Rehman arrested for protesting against hate-monger, Nupur Sharma

The post Threat letter from Al-Qaeda in Indian Subcontinent Issues after BJP Leaders’ Comments appeared first on SabrangIndia.

I  ask  myself, would  Bhagwan Ram who thought nothing of  giving up  his royal due in Ayodhya   have  applauded the   zealous assault on the erstwhile Babri mosque?

Would  Jesus  have been  heartened  by the crusades fought in his name?

Would  Prophet Mohammed have   approved of  the beheading  of a journalist  for the preservation of his honour?

I think not.

God  gave us the prophets  for  human betterment.  We made them  sectarian, religious heads.

The  question to ponder is this:  can any coercive  incorporation  of human beings  into sects and denominations ever be compatible with the intentions of prophets?   Can any pursuit of faith that does not issue from free will  ever be either truly  soulful or  sanctified?

The current debate  about the seemingly  antagonistc  claims of  the  right to free expression and the  exalted status of religions  thus seems  a faulty one ab initio.

No prophets  have ever  instructed that calumnies against them  be made occasions for consolidating  rabid h ordes  detailed  to  bolster their standing among men, or to  snatch consent from  the  recalcitrant.

Allegiance to any faith is hardly allegiance that is not freely given, and no denial  of faith, however crudely expressed, can be offensive to  prophets  whose appeal has always been to a voluntary and felt  make-over of the individual soul and psyche.

In our current worldwide contexts,  it would be well for  religious  affcionados  to recognize  that  laicite is as much a faith as any other.  And if votaries of secularism  make no distinctions between  other faiths that  contest  secularism, the assumption of  malice  only  bespeaks an insecurity of beliefs  that feel threatened by other beliefs.

After all,  no prophets of any religion have been  in history spared  by  caricaturists and mavericks  in their bid to assert the freedom of  expression.

Nor is it any fact that  religions are monoliths of belief systems.  Within  Sanatan  and Buddhist    thought reside eloquent traditions of atheism;  within Christianity exist denominations that deny the divinity of Christ; and within the world of Isalm there are  traditions  who remain  opposed to dogma, teaching a non-discriminatory  humanism  that  leaves no one out.

It would be well, therefore,  to recognize that the freedom of thought and expression  is as integral to  religious faiths at their truest and noblest as it is  to  secularists   who advocate separation of church and state even though many of them  may  well retain privately conducted forms of  spiritual  conviction and even  forms of  personal prayer.

And all belief systems  must  remain  rather  hollow  should they  descend to  violence  instead of meeting  annoyances with  reason and  an unshakable  conviction that requires no forced or crude  assertion.

God, we are told, made  man and woman.  Men made religions.  Iti is hardly to be thought that  any  religion can be ultimately  persuasive that does not place  the  principles of humanism above  sectarian dogmas and  ritualistic practices.

Of all things in life,  freedom of expression must be the bed rock  of the faiths we espouse, if the  work of the prophets is truly to be  understood and accomplished.

No slavery is worse than a slavery to a faith that is not willingly adopted and felt  in the bone. And our plurality of faiths, including secularism, demnds that we respect convictions other than our own  as we do  laws  democratically  legislated  that  affect us diversely.

The post All In the Name of the Prophets appeared first on SabrangIndia.

They gathered as a part of their countrywide protest program

Members of influential Islamist platform Hefazat-e-Islam Bangladesh held a rally in front of Dhaka’s Baitul Mukarram Mosque to protest against the recent violence in Bhola, which left four people dead and hundreds injured.

Hefazat members, primarily madrasa teachers and students, gathered near the national mosque on Topkhana Road on Tuesday afternoon, as part of their nationwide campaign.

Activists representing Hefazat-e-Islam said they had had plans to roll out a large procession from Baitul Mukarram, but decided to instead hold a protest rally there.

Addressing the rally, Nur Hossain Kashemi, chief of the Dhaka Metropolitan chapter of Hefazat-e-Islam, said people will never put up with those who do not respect Islam’s holy Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). 

He added that those who could not uphold the dignity of the holy Prophet (pbuh) have no right to remain in power.

A stricter law with provisions for capital punishment must be introduced for those who make disparaging comments about Allah and the prophets (pbuh) or messengers, he said, adding that the protests will continue unless such laws are put in place.

Kashemi, also the vice president of the Islamist group, said that Bangladesh is a country of peace,and Hefazat-e-Islam believes in peace and harmony, so his group will continue to peacefully protest events.

Kashemi made a series of additional demands of the government. They were: withdraw police cases in Bhola, immediately release the arrestees, withdraw the relevant police station’s OC and Bhola’s SP, and ban the operation of ISKCON in Bangladesh.

Meanwhile, Paltan police station Officer-in-Charge (OC) Abu Bakar Siddique said,“a large number of policemen were deployed; however, the planned protest event ended rather peacefully.”

During the rally, vehicular movement from Dainik Bangla to Paltan intersections was halted for two hours.

Hefazat organized a similar rally in Chittagong
Meanwhile, members of Hefazat-e-Islam held a similar rally in the port city, also in protest at the Bhola clash.

As part of a nationwide protest program, Hefazat supporters assembled near Jamiatul Falah mosque after Zohr prayer on Tuesday.

While addressing the rally, Hefazat Secretary General Juanyed Babunagari demanded the punishment of Biplob Chandra Shuvo,from whose Facebook ID messages containing derogatory remarks about Allah and the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) were allegedly sent.

Hefazat men with placards rally in front of Baitul Mukarram mosque on Tuesday, October 22, 2019 |Mahmud Hossian Opu/Dhaka Tribune The Hefazat leader also demanded exemplary punishment of the people involved in the shooting that left four people dead and injured scores.

“We will not tolerate offensive remarks about Allah and Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) in a Muslim-majority country. Bangladesh is a democratic country and it is our civic right to voice concerns over any incongruity. The countrymen will not tolerate any bloodshed. The devout Muslims have been deeply dismayed as the police fired on a peaceful procession in Bhola. Thousands of people are ready to sacrifice their lives to protect the honor of the Prophet (pbuh),” Babunagari said.

Expressing his condolences to the bereaved families, Babunagari said that people who follow in the footsteps of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) would launch a tougher movement if the perpetrators went unpunished.

“Necessary action should be taken against the SP, the OC and the police personnel responsible for the deaths. Compensation should be given to the families of the deceased while injured should be given proper treatment,” said the Hefazat leader.

Passing through strategic points in the city, the protest march ended at Wasa intersection.

What happened in Bhola ?
On Sunday, four people were killed and more than 200 injured in a clash in Borhanuddin upazila – many of them suffered gunshot wounds.

Police and locals said messages containing derogatory remarks about Allah and the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) were sent to several persons from the Facebook ID of Biplob Chandra Shuvo. 

Screenshots of the messages went viral on Facebook, triggering condemnation and protests.

First published in https://www.dhakatribune.com/

The post Protests against defamatory remarks on Prophet continue: Bangladesh appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Image credit:  Shehla Rashid via Facebook
 

Aligarh Muslim University students, who stood by their counterparts in Jawaharlal Nehru University through many crises over the past year, on Thursday slammed their door shut on former JNU students’ union vice-president, Shehla Rashid Shora. Not only did the Aligarh university’s students’ union cancel a meeting of student leaders planned for Saturday that Shora and five others from JNU were slated to attend, it even filed a police complaint against her.

The reason it stated: Shora allegedly made objectionable remarks against Prophet Mohammad in a Facebook post. On January 9, she allegedly wrote “insulting things” about other religions too, the Aligharh students union said. Her post had “disturbed students” and could potentially “spoil [the campus] atmosphere”. On social media, other Aligarh students accused her of blasphemy.
 

Hate speech and religion

Shora’s post was on hate speech. The paragraph to which some AMU students took strong exception dealt with hate speech and insulting statements about religious figures. Some also took offence with an article she wrote in 2013 arguing that Prophet Mohammad was a feminist.
 

Students protest

The controversy boiled up over February 14 and 15, when Aligarh Muslim University Students’ Union president, Faizul Hasan announced on his Facebook page that the union was organising an “all India students’ leader meet” at the university and had signed on over a dozen leaders, six from JNU alone, to speak. The others invited from JNU were student leaders Kanhaiya Kumar, Umar Khalid, current president Mohit Kumar Pandey and another former president, Akbar Chaudhary.
 

The reactions poured in soon after with Facebook users posting sections from Shora’s post. One called her “shaitaan” – devil – and another wrote, “I would slap her if she will say anything about religion.” A student group called the Aligarh Muslim University Students’ Front issued a handbill declaring her a “Gustaakh-e-Rasool” – “One who says something wrong about the Prophet,” explained Ghazala Ahmad of the students’ union. They described Shora’s post as “blasphemous.”
 

‘Hurt Sentiments’

Shora was furious. She alleged on Facebook that “a very jealous person [was] trying to instigate students of AMU against [her]”. She also pointed out that fuss over her alleged blasphemy would draw attention away from the issue she had wanted to discuss – the disappearance of JNU student, Najeeb Ahmed, from campus in October, after a scuffle with members of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh’s student wing, the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad.

“I will not defend myself, because anyone who is acting outraged has either not read the article, or is trying divert the issue from Najeeb,” she wrote. “I refuse to allow myself to be targeted for giving scholarly opinion on hate speech.” She was still going to Aligarh, she wrote.

But on Friday, she issued a statement announcing she had cancelled her visit because she feared, given the conditions on the Aligarh campus, that her presence “might create an unnecessary media spectacle and…divert the issue from Najeeb Ahmed’s disappearance”.

Khalid wrote a post in Shora’s support saying:
 

‘Hurt sentiments’ are largely used by the dominant majority to silence and even kill the minority communities and it thrives on lies and rumour mongering….But what this case reveals is that some forces even within the persecuted minority deploy such tactics, when they see the possibilities of democratisation within. 
 

Leaders’ meet postponed

On Friday, the Aligarh students’ union decided to postpone the programme.
 

Aligarh student leader Hasan’s note accompanying the image of the handbill online left no doubt about what those “unavoidable circumstances” were. He wrote: “Our executive decision is for alma matter and our religion. We the student’ Union is for whole AMU and its interest, we will boycott who blame on our religion and our beloved Prophet.”

This decision also drew criticsm. One student argued that they could have just left Shora out instead of cancelling the entire event. Another wrote that her Facebook post “does not amount to blasphemy or a hate speech against Islam or Muslims.” He suggested that the union “seek the support of Marxists, Ambedkarites etc. so that common problems of…marginalised sections of India are resolved conveniently”.
 

 

This article was first published on Scroll.in

The post Objections to JNU’s Shehla Rashid prompt Aligarh Muslim University students to postpone event appeared first on SabrangIndia.