Wednesday, April 23, 2014

Facts Sheet: India elections

India has a parliamentary system of government with two chambers: Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha. Lok Sabha members are elected by the people while Rajya Sabha members are elected primarily by elected representatives in various assemblies.

Total Number of Parliamentary Constituency, for Lok Sabha:       543 (79 are reserved for scheduled Castes and 41 for Scheduled Tribes)
Total Number of voters:                                                                   814.5 millions
Total Number of Parties:                                                                  1622 (6 national parties, 23 state parties, and 1593 registered unrecognized parties)
Total Polling Stations:                                                                      935,000
Total Poll Workers:                                                                           8 millions
Amount of Money each candidate is allowed to spend:                   $118,000
Total expenses of the Election Commission:                                    $600 millions
Number of Election Symbols used by parties                                   87
The parliamentary constituency with the largest number of electors -         3368399 (Outer Delhi)
The parliamentary constituency with the lowest number of electors -         39033 (Lakshadweep)
The parliamentary constituency with the largest Area - Ladakh (J&K)-     173266.37 sq. km
The Parliamentary constituency with the smallest Area - Chandni Chowk (Delhi)- 10.59 sq. km
Maximum contestants in a parliamentary constituency -               35 (Madras south)
A polling station with least number of electors: Only ONE voter in Polling station No. - 29;(Dharampur) in Miao Assembly segment of Arunachal East parliamentary constituency
Maximum Women contestants in a state -                                        61 (UP)
Minimum women contestants in a state -                                          1 (Goa)
Maximum age of the candidate-                                                        94 years (Ramchandra Veerappa in Bidar, Karnataka)
Minimum age of the candidate -                                                        25 years (Many).
Maximum age of the winning candidate-                                          94 years (Ramchandra Veerappa in Bidar, Karnataka)
Minimum age of the winning candidate-                                            26 years Sachin Pilot in Dausa (Rajasthan)
Maximum votes secured -                                                                   Sajjan Kumar outer Delhi - 855543
Minimum votes secured - Ashok Kumar                                            Chandni Chowk- 45
Minimum votes secured by a winner - Dr. P. Pookunhikoya,            15597 votes (Lakshadweep).
Maximum margin, Arambagh PC of West Bengal                              592502 votes.
Minimum margin, Lakshadweep,                                                        71 Votes
Average age of the elected MPs is                                                       52.63 Years.

Whom did Muslims vote in General Elections: (percentage)

Party 1996 1998 1999 2004 2009
Congress 32 32 40 36 36
BJP 2 5 6 7 3

46 constituencies with more than 30% Muslim population
States Number of constituencies Names
West Bengal 11 RAIGANJ (47.36%), MALDA UTTAR (49.73%), MALDA DAKSHIN (53.46) JANGIPUR (63.67%), MURSHIDABAD (58.31%), Baharampur (63.67%), DIAMOND HARBOUR (33.24%), BIRBHUM (35.08%) , Jadavpur (33.24%), Joynagar (33.24%),,  Mathurapur (33.24%)
Uttar Pradesh 13 BIJNOR (38.33%), AMROHA (37.50%), MORADABAD (44.78%), RAMPUR (49.14%), MEERUT (30.86%), MUZAFFARNAGAR (36.94%), KAIRANA (38.53%), SAHARANPUR (39.11%), SAMBHAL (45.54%), NAGINA (41.71), Bahraich (34.83%), BAREILLY (33.89%), Shrawasti (31.34%)
Jammu & Kashmir 5 BARAMULLA (97%), SRINAGAR (90%), ANANTNAG (95%), LADAKH (46%), UDHAMPUR (31%)
Assam 4 KARIMGANJ (45%), DHUBRI (56%), BARPETA (39%), NAGAON (33%)
Kerala 6 KASARAGOD (32.54), KOZHIKODE (37.47), MALLAPURAM (68.53%), PONNANI (64%) Wayanad (57.98%), Vadakara (34.70%)
Bihar 4 ARARIA (41.14%), KISHANGANJ (56.66%), KATIHAR (42.53%), Purnia (37.65%)
Andhra Pradesh 2 HYDERABAD (41.17%)%), Secundrabad (41.17%)
Lakshadweep 1 LAKSHADWEEP (95.47%)
 Muslim Member of Parliament since 1952

Year of polls Number of MPs %
1 1952 11 2
2 1957 19 4
3 1962 20 4
4 1967 25 5
5 1971 28 6
6 1977 34 7
7 1980 49 10
8 1984 42 8
9 1989 27 6
10 1991 25 5
11 1996 29 6
12 1998 28 6
13 1999 31 6
14 2004 34 7
15 2009 30 6
 

Tuesday, April 22, 2014

India:  From Democracy to Modocracy:

The Greatest Show of People's will on earth
The big show of democracy in the world is taking place in India. 814.5 million voters will elect 543 members  of India’s lower house, Lok Sabha on May 16 through a process of election in five phases. On the one hand, is the Indian National Congress and its allies and on the other is the Bhartiya Janata Party and its allies. There are other groups in the fray, yet the main contest is between these major parties. The Congress and its allies claim to represent people espousing secular, and pluralistic values while the BJP represent people believing in the ideology of Hindutva, meaning that India is primarily a Hindu nation and its Hindu identity must never be negated. The Congress is pitching Rahul Gandhi, the great-grandson of India’s first prime minister, Jawahar Lal Nehru, while the BJP has fielded Narendra Modi, a 63-year-old man who until fairly recently was denied the US visa for presiding over the genocide of Muslims in 2002 in the State of Gujarat he ran as Chief Minister for over 12 years.
The issue is simple. What kind of India will emerge after May 16, an India run by secularists or an India run by the champions of Hindutva. It is this issue that overrides all other issues, including the development and employment in the coming years.  The BJP is trying to create a secular image for itself by declaring that it believes in one nation, and in one person. But the one nation theory in the BJP does not refer to Indians, rather to Hindus and Hindus of upper castes or those who in religious terms are described as twice-born. Indian politics are primarily dominated by these so-called twice-born leaders during the last 66 years under different names and pretexts and this election cycle it is not different in substance. It is based on deception with a few exceptions here and there
Deception is the act of making someone believe something that is not true. The latest statement of Modi, BJP candidate for the Indian Prime-ministerial position, describing Muslims as brothers is a cacophony in deception. The glibness in this is well evident. Once he called the same "brothers" puppies and once he wanted to teach them a lesson, but now they are his brothers because he wants to create an image of a compassionate leader ready to govern the world's largest democracy. It is nothing but a sham and an exercise in deceit. Even though politics itself is a deceptive art, but one has to coin a new term to describe what Modi has been saying and doing. We can call it Modocracy, a process to take control of the government through a web of lies and deceptions.
The real agenda of BJP is dictated by the Rashtriya Swayam Sewak Sangh (RSS) an organization created on the pattern of the Nazi party. Its agenda is to create a Hindu Rashtra (nation) run by the teachings of its religious scriptures. This Rashtra must reflect the Hindu social structure where people are accorded a stagnant position by birth, where purity and profanity are dependent on one's birth to his or her caste and where certain castes are most favored by the society and the creator because they were born in a state of purity. RSS believes in an India has little room for non-Hindus. Muslims, Christians, Buddhists, even Jains and Jews must succumb to Hindu social structure and the laws and accept the superiority of the upper castes because they are malich or untouchables. The emergence of Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism, the three indigenous religions of India clearly speaks of the religious protests against upper-caste lead Hinduism in the past.
RSS and BJP have already succeeded in infiltrating India’s schools, military, bureaucracy, and law enforcement agencies as well as the media and judiciary. They are promoting their ideals in these vital institutions creating hatred. RSS and BJP leaders are threatening people who are opposed to their style of leadership of dire consequences and they are inciting Hindus to ostracize Muslims in their colonies. They are reminding Hindus to get ready to take revenge from Muslims for the wrongs their forefathers committed against Hindus.
RSS believes that violence can be used to reconvert Muslims and Christians to Hinduism and the future conversion to Islam and Christianity can be stopped through legal means. RSS believes that once in power, it can change the constitution to serve its political agenda. So in a Modi-led government, discrimination and injustices would be given a constitutional framework, the same strategy followed by Hitler's Germany when the holocaust was approved by the will of the people within a legal framework.
Congress Party and its allies are burdened with the accusations of corruption, hence they are unable to match the rhetoric of the BJP. Regional parties might pose challenges to the BJP and a new player may cause tremors in Indian politics. The new player is Aam Admi (common people) Party (AAP). It is running at close to 400 Lok Sabha seats. No one knows how it would fare. Its fate is as its name suggests in the hands of common voters. If the common voters are convinced with the integrity and style of the AAP, it may provide the biggest shock in Indian politics. It is possible that it might but nothing can be predicted about it because of the role of money and propaganda as well as caste and religion in Indian politics. Can an average non-aligned voter take a decision based on the strength of his convictions for a clean political system? This election might provide a clue to it.
Muslims in India are bewildered with the political drama unfolding in front of their eyes. Divided into political camps, castes, classes, and clans and on sectarian and religious lines, they are looking at everyone to save them from Modi or RSS. Some have opted to join the RSS and BJP and Modi bandwagon believing that if they cannot beat them, they can join them. Those who have joined BJP are fully aware of RSS agenda and Modi murders, yet political expediency seems to be more relevant to them than the bitter truth.
Politics of deception that is being played in independent India is manifesting itself fully in this election. Politicians, in general, do not tell the truth but speak lies and that too loudly.  Non-Indian groups have been inducted into this election campaign. Image makers, policy creators, message broadcasters from the US, Japan, Britain, Israel, and other places are hired by political parties to deceive voters so that victory could be achieved. Megacorporations see a big opportunity in these elections to use their money to win as many mercenaries through ballots as they can. Indian democracy is in one heck of a mess.
Democracy is transforming itself into Modocracy with little regard to pluralistic values and human dignity that it was initially introduced for.

Wednesday, April 16, 2014

How to Combat Extremism?

The Muslim Public Affairs Council, a national Muslim organization, recently came up with a solution to the problem of violent extremism or extremism among Muslims. Its executive summary reads that “Imams and community leaders have the ability to address theological, social, and familial issues much more effectively than law enforcement,” and Muslim efforts should be “intended to proactively prevent acts of violent extremism from being born inside our community institutions.” It concludes that if all efforts fail to contain extremists only as last resort, should eviction from a community occurs, charging communities with working “toward safely removing that individual from the congregation and contacting law enforcement.”  
It is a document that has good intentions and genuine concerns as well as good suggestions. But, it leaves many questions unanswered as part of the analysis is seemingly weak or naïve at times. However, as a preliminary step towards the ultimate goal of developing a genuine understanding of extremism in Islam as it should be appreciated. As far as the suggestions to combat extremism are concerned, they are simply suggestions and many more can be offered by the community members if involved in the discussion.
The document makes several assumptions that need to be substantiated and suggests several solutions that deserve to be critically examined. Some of the underlying assumptions are:
1.     The American Muslim community has a substantial number of extremists.
2.     Many of these stealth extremists may become violent.
3.     Imams and community leaders are more effective in dealing with violent extremists than law enforcement agencies.
4.     Muslim imams should police their own communities and engage those who are extremists in order to help them change their perspectives.
5.     If they fail to contain the extremists, they should then excommunicate such members and inform the police.

Extremism
Extremism is an elusive political term and in general sense considered to be far outside the mainstream attitudes of a community or a society. Or it is also defined as a set of ideas that violate the common moral standards  
In the context of Islam, extremism is used as a set of ideas that is based on the extremely conservative view of Islam that may not necessarily promote violence or the use of extreme violent tactics for achieving perceived religious objectives. But these are arbitrary abstract definitions and can be applied to define any group extremist. For instance, in the view of many Zionist organizations in this country, MPAC or Council of American Muslim Relations (CAIR) are two extremist organizations.
If this set of definitions is applied to define Muslim communities, then probably every Muslim group can categorize others as extremist or violent extremist. So, before we really talk about it, we need to develop an objective and realistic definition of extremism. Currently, our existing definitions of extremism are subjective and politically motivated. We have no consensus. The FBI has a different set of definitions, the CIA has different. The Republicans and Democrats have contradictory definitions and the Islamophobes have their own set of ideas. So the first thing that should be our priority is to define extremism from our sociological, theological perspective.
The responsibility of defining extremism within the Muslim community rests with Muslim intellectuals and religious scholars. We never had the debate to understand it and define it in our social and political context. Hence each is relying on a subjective definition and that does not serve any purpose. In Islamic literature, one can easily find examples where every Muslim sect and group has been defined as extremist by fellow Muslim groups. Moreover, in the absence of an objective definition, we rely on a definition that serves the purpose of some special interest groups.
Lack of Data
Even if we use a subjective definition of extremism, there are no data to prove that the American Muslim community has extremism widely prevalent in its ranks. There is no survey and no study that suggests that. On the contrary, several studies conducted by Muslims and others have suggested that the bulk of the Muslim community rarely visits Islamic institutions established to serve them One such study suggests that only 20 percent Muslims attend the Friday congregational prayers. Las Vegas seems to have a Muslim population of 15,000 to 18,000. The total number of people who offer Friday prayers in five of the city’s masjid regularly is about 1300 including women, That is less than 10 percent of the population. A similar pattern is visible in Arizona, Utah, and California as well as other states. So before one talks about the problem one should study its dimensions and scope.
The Imam and community leaders
Of over 3,000 masjids in the US, some 80 percent have imams who are trained in foreign countries with little understanding of English, the constitution of the US, the history of Muslims in America and the social and political realities of the country. They may be well versed in Islamic jurisprudence but have no idea of the legal system of this country. In fact, their knowledge of Islam mainly comes from their sectarian upbringing. A Shia mosque has a Shia scholar coming from established Shia communities in different parts of the world and a Sunni mosque has a Sunni Imam in representing a particular school of thought. Each is strict in his own traditions and often unwilling to accommodate the differences of opinion.  How could such Imam who has no clue of existing conditions of their own larger communities play an effective role in combating extremism? In fact, many of them may easily be described as extremists by the subjective definitions, arbitrarily used by many. The curriculum prepared by some institutions to train Imam lack any reference to the times and social matrix of the society we all are living.
Most community leaders are non-representational of their communities. They are not elected and in many cases elected through manipulations. They may represent a particular ideological perspective without revealing that. Obviously, they do not carry lots of weight within their own communities. For instance, many Muslim community leaders still owe their allegiance to either the Jamat Islami, Pakistan, Bangladesh or India or Ikhwanul Muslimeen of Egypt or Hizb Tahrir of Jordan, or Tablighi Jamat or other similar Islamic groups
Policing the Community
In a free society, each is entitled to freedom of ideas and expression. The US allows even extremists the freedom to flourish. Amish people are considered extreme by many modernists, yet they have full rights to live the way they want to live as long as they owe oath of allegiance to the constitution and maintain law and order.  No one can police the thought process of the other. It is dangerous and amounts to vigilante. If we allow this within our community, why do we, then, object to others when they do the same to us.
Having extremist ideas is not a crime in this country. Acting on ideas that defy the constitution of the country is. KKK still exists and several groups owing allegiance to Hitler are also active in this country. Several hate groups are active without being prosecuted. 
As a citizen or a community, it is within our legal right to seek restrictive orders for an individual we do not like to be part of our congregation.  But to hand him over to the police for his ideas would be against the spirit of freedom of ideas that our religion and this country promote. I should not call the FBI if I find that a member of my community believes that women should not be allowed in the masjid for some extreme reasons. Or I should not invite the police to arrest a man because he is reading a verse of the Quran that is translated by many that “Jews and Christians should be taken as friends,” I can give him my perspective on the verse but cannot force him to change his perspective. Even if he insists on an extremist definition, I have no business to report him to the FBI and the Police. Who would guarantee that the Imams or leaders who themselves are representing a particular sect or faction would always have a fair play.
If Imam and community leaders want to be informants, paid or unpaid, they have every right to do so. But to expect the community to spy on each other for his or her ideas is not feasible, especially when we have a different understanding of extremism.
Some Proposals
Following are some of the concrete proposals that might help us handle the problem of extremism effectively.

1.     Define what extremism and especially Muslim extremism is? Such a definition should be sociologically and theologically founded on strong grounds.
2.     Have a national survey of extremism within the Muslim community based on the agreed-upon definition.
3.     Have a survey of masajds and their imams and their ideas on issues identified as extremism.
4.     Effectively engage in dialogue with law enforcement agencies in efforts to prevent incidents of violence.
5.     Commission books and position papers on issues that have often been used by groups to promote extremism.
6.     Help develop a democratic culture in Islamic institutions.
7.     Let women and youth occupy 75 percent of the board positions in masajids and Islamic institutions.
8.     Involve people in the decision making-process of Islamic institutions so that more and more people can understand the social and political environment they live in.
9.     Provide civic education to people so that they can understand their civic responsibilities and rights.
10. Organize a conference of Imams and community leaders to discuss the issue and strategies to combat extremism.

Friday, April 4, 2014

The Conspirators in the Demolition of the Babri Masjid

What was always feared has now been confirmed. The Babari Masjid was not demolished by the fringe of a hateful, fanatic and crazy mob, but by a well trained, militant group of terrorists who were coached by none other than former members of the Indian army, police, and intelligence. The sting operation that revealed this best-known secret for over two decades concludes that the culprits behind the destruction were the Rashtriya Swayam Sewak Sangh, Shiv Sena, the BJP, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and all other constituents of Hindutva in India and USA. It was a plot that was carried out with precision with the knowledge of the chief minister of the state of Uttar Pradesh and the Prime Minister of India. India's intelligence agencies knew about it, and the military intelligence was aware of it. Yet none could act in defense of India's constitution that guarantees the protection of places of worship of all faiths.
The story of the demolition of the Babri masjid is the story of a group of terrorists who under the garb of religion, wearing the cloak of Hindu nationalism promotes fascism. It is this group that is now knocking at the gates of India's parliament and is aspirated to lead the country in the future. Those who plotted or were part of the demolition are among those who are contesting as candidates for India's highest legislative body under the cloak of secularism and development.
Who knows how many more plots these groups and individuals have been involved in since the independence of India from British Raj? Who knows how far these outfits have penetrated in India's political, bureaucratic, educational, financial and technology sectors? Who knows how many intelligence officers and military personnel and political officials owe their loyalty to these groups. The RSS has a network of over 100,000 relief organizations and over thousands of militant boot camps and no one knows with precision how many of its members have become part of India's law enforcement agencies.
The sting operation revelation also gives us a sad picture of India's law enforcement agencies that failed miserably either to investigate the criminals and conspirators or to bring out charges against them. It also speaks volumes of the hateful ideology that RSS has used to poison the minds of its members about Islam, Christianity and other faiths. The RSS is founded on the notion that without subduing Islam and making Muslims and Christians ineffective, Hindu upper castes cannot fulfill their dream to establish a kingdom of gods on earth that would ensure their domination in all aspects of Indian life. Muslims and Christians, in the analysis of RSS, were bad for the Hinduism. They both forced millions of Hindus to convert to their faith, they both were responsible for the murder and rape of Hindu men and women. They both engaged in a systematic annihilation of Hindu civilization. The Hindutva forces believe that in order to reassert its identity, the Muslims have to be systematically uprooted from places where they have created their own pockets of influence. 
In order to gain ascendency in India's politics, the Hindu nationalist forces are inciting Hindu masses and creating conditions that provoke ordinary members of their community against Muslims and Christians. During the planning for the demolition of the Babri Masjid, the leadership of the Hindutva was unanimous in creating conditions that would inflict pain and death upon Hindus leading to their strong retaliation against Muslims. Who knows if the so-called fake encounters the police has plotted were cooked in the BJP and RSS kitchen? Who knows if the so-called Indian Mujahideen have the blessings of the RSS or other Hindu groups? Who knows how many more plots are being hatched?
The response of Muslim leadership to this and many similar challenges like these is that of an intellectually challenged person. Unable to identify their objectives and defend their interests, their leaders act in a sectarian, factional and selfish manner, ignoring the basic principles of stewardship. Like a rudderless ship, they are floating at the mercy of the waves without defining their own interests. Their leadership probably thinks that by raising a few emotional slogans here and there they would be able to overcome the challenges. What they do not realize is that they are confronted with a group that is organized, dynamic and constantly planning for the annihilation of Muslims. So myopic is the Muslim intellectual leadership that many of its stalwarts have already accepted the leadership of the Hindutva forces without looking at the implications of their action for their community and the country.
The response of Muslim intellectuals is even more painful. They argue that the BJP does not offer that big of a danger that people perceive it to offer. These people refuse to learn from history. The BJP is not only a political organization, but a political wing of the world's best organized, and the dangerous ideological group that believes in the racial superiority, religious purity and social ascendency of a group of people bound together with a 5,000-year-old history. The demolition of the Babri Masjid and the emerging details of the conspiracy to demolish it proves that once again and offers a clear warning to Muslims and India that if not checked and controlled, this group is capable of causing the the worst holocaust that humans have yet to witness.

Wednesday, February 26, 2014

Who Defines Us? Who are We? 

by Dr. Aslam Abdullah
A debate has been going on within certain circles of the Muslim community about defining or redefining Islam and its followers.

Several terms have been designed to make a distinction among Muslims' various theological, and socio-political schools of thoughts. These terms sometimes appear attractive, especially in the state of confusion in which we live. They provide us with different approaches to identify ourselves.
However, when we look at these terms deeply, we begin to realize that they are meant to define us in the mold of our thinking influenced by our social and political milieu.

Terms that are in fashion currently are moderate Islam, progressive Islam, enlightened Islam, modern Islam, extremist Islam, liberal Islam, conservative Islam, reformed Islam, orthodox Islam, fundamentalist Islam, medieval Islam, political Islam, radical Islam, and obscurantist Islam, etc.
What is interesting is that these terms emerge from the limitations of our own readings of Islam controlled by our own social-political experiences. For instance, in the context of the U.S. and the West, it is now fashionable to use terms such as progressive Islam and moderate Islam.
When asked to define these terms, their proponents say that "moderate" or "progressive" Islam opposes violence, accepts the universal charter of human rights promotes gender equality and recognizes the idea of pluralism.
Dialectically what they are saying is that there is an Islam that does not recognize the value of non-violence, that rejects universal charter of human rights and that opposes the idea of gender equality and pluralism. If this is the basis of redefining Islam, then it is a weak premise.
Islam is a faith divinely given to human beings to live their lives according to certain values originally defined by the Divine. People have a choice to reject them or to accept them because they are responsible for their own actions. Islam does not advocate violence. Those who use violence as a means to achieve their goals, however noble their goals may be, are essentially in violation of their faith. They are the ones who are deviating from the path of Islam.
Why should their deviation cause some Muslims to redefine Islam and form a separate category of moderate or progressive Islam in order to make the distinction between the two? There are always people and groups who use their faith to promote their own political and economic agenda. This is true with all religions. The most effective way to confront such people is to develop a sound argument on the basis of a comprehensive understanding of the divine values and prophetic teachings.
This is a struggle that we all have to carry on within ourselves and in the society at large. Creating further divisions and categorizing ourselves in terms that refer to our own political expediencies will not serve the real purpose of the faith. Islam, that, after all, demands from every Muslim to be a witness to the truth.
The truth is clear in Islam. We cannot change it for our political purposes. Thus, the coinage of these terms is primarily a weak strategy that defeats the very purpose of the faith.
The questions that ought to be raised, then, are: what is this truth and how do we discern it from the falsehood? The truth will emerge from our quest of knowledge, experiences, wisdom, and guidance from the Divine. The truth will not be dictated by a few sound bites of political or theological leaders.
In the case of Islam, the truth, as perceived by Muslims based on their general readings of the Quran is that Islam is a divinely revealed faith that commands its adherents to follow the principles of monotheism, justice, progress, equality, and peace in all aspects of their life.
We have to understand our world in the context of these divinely revealed truths and develop suitable instruments to ensure that they are shared with the rest of the world.
Thus, our struggle is to be a witness to these truths and to challenge all those who are in violation of these regardless of what label they assume.
In the Quran, the Divine tells us of people who would call themselves Muslims, yet, would do everything that is contrary to the teachings of Islam. Thus, it is not a prudent strategy to say that because of the deviations of others, we are changing our self-definition and coining a new term to describe our relationship with our faith. Our commitment to our faith is based on the criterion of right and wrong.
The propagation of new terminologies by various Muslims is leading our community into a bewilderment of confusing ideas without realizing that the principles of faith cannot be compromised for our understanding or lack of understanding of socio-political realities.
Thus, we have two tasks at hand. First, internally--we have to challenge those who are distorting and destroying the foundation of Islam, and second we have to communicate to the rest of the world the real foundation on which our faith stands.
It is better that we spend our time and resources in these areas rather than wasting our energy in coining and re-coining terms that confuse us and others as well.
When we do what is expected of us in Islam, we will notice a qualitative change in our own attitude as well as the attitude of the people in our and others faith.

Tuesday, February 25, 2014

Withdraw Modi as Prime Ministerial Candidate and Prove Your Sincerity to the Nation.

Dr. Aslam Abdullah
"Elect Narendra Modi as India's next prime minister and you would be safe and secure. The Court has given him a clean chit. Don't believe in propaganda against the BJP. We believe in the supremacy of Indian constitution. Hindutva is nothing but a way of life and Muslims are part of the family. Tell us where did we go wrong and we would bow our head and apologize and accept our mistakes and shortcomings."
This is what the President of the Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) said, addressing a  gathering of Muslims.  Not in exact words, but this was the gist of his speech to a Muslim audience. How should Muslim Indians react to this statement and how should the world react to this change in the BJP tone?
Seemingly, it sounds wonderful that the BJP is offering an apology. But if viewed carefully, Rajnath's statement is full of arrogance and shrewd Chanakya -style diplomacy. After all, it was Chanakya who said, "A person should not be too honest because straight trees are cut first and honest people are screwed first." Or "Never share your secrets with others and never reveal to them what you truly think if you want to dominate." 
The BJP president in his speech was essentially saying, "we did not commit any mistakes, but if you point out to us that we were wrong and we also admit on the authority of our own analysis that we were wrong, we would admit." But the most dangerous of the statement that he made was in defense of Hindutva. It is a way of life, he said, and we believe in the supremacy of the constitution. He was implying that Hindutva would be given a constitutional framework once his party comes to power.  He probably forgot to realize the existence of the caste system in this way of life that has turned India's majority as sub-humans through its long history.
His defense of Modi was ridiculous and childish that speak of his conniving politics. Chanakya again came to his help here as the great Hindu diplomat once remarked that rulers have a right play with facts in order to stay in power.
The President of the BJP, further, said that Modi is innocent of Muslim genocide as the court has absolved him from all accusations.
Non-conviction of an accused does not mean that the crime was not committed and the accused was not responsible for the crime. It simply means the lack of sufficient evidence on the part of those who collect information. It might also mean manipulation on the part of those responsible to look into the matter. It may also mean the manipulation of evidence. With RSS strongly present in state and federal structures, police and intelligence, and even in the judiciary and academics, nothing can be ruled out. After all, it was in Gujarat, many fake encounters were engineered under the chief minister-ship of Modi.
In the eyes of many Indians, Muslims and non-Muslims alike, Modi is not clean. His hands drip the blood of innocent citizens of his own state. He proved his incompetence in protecting the life of the citizens of his own state. How can anyone trust him with the life of citizens of India as a whole?
The BJP believes that its image among Muslims is built on false propaganda spread by Congress and others. But, facts speak louder than words.
Several reliable and objective studies, both academic and governmental, have clearly revealed that the BJP leadership and cadre were involved in engineering violence against minorities including Muslims during the last 66 years of India's independence. More than a million people were reportedly killed in these riots and acts of violence. Who can forget the demolition of the Babari Masjid? The BJP leadership was there to incite their cadre and it witnessed the brick by brick demolition? The Ram Mandar Rath Yatra was engineered by BJP and slogans raised against Muslims in those rallies were part of the official policy of the party. In their internal meetings, questions about the loyalties of Muslims are always raised as they are considered fifth columnists by many of them.
BJP is the political wing of RSS and the hostility of the RSS towards Muslims and other minorities is well known. At the time when the BJP chief was speaking with Muslims, hundreds of CDs and thousands of pamphlets against Muslims and Islam were in circulation all over the country.
In the Muzzafarnagar riots, late last year, the BJP members were said to be leading the rioters and inciting people to kill, burn and rape Muslims.
Yet, the BJP has the audacity to say that if proved by the court and pointed to it by Muslims, then it would look into their charges and if their researchers pointed out to us that we were wrong, it would apologize.
Obviously, what was said by Rajnath is nothing but an exercise in shrewd diplomacy. After all, it was Chanakya, part of the Upper caste Hindu diplomacy in the past, who had justified all deceitful means to grab power. The BJP leader playing the game that politicians like him always play. The party that demolished a house of worship and proudly describes the violence as an act of their Hindutva cannot be trusted. .
Nevertheless, let us assume that the BJP is sincere in its offer to apologize. Here is the litmus test. Withdraw Narendra Modi as the prime ministerial candidate and assure the country, that because his character has been tainted as he has been accused of committing genocide against Muslims, he would never be considered a contender for the highest position in the country. Let us ask Rajnath to go back to his party and convince its brass of the usefulness of the withdrawal of Modi from the national electoral race. Otherwise, what he said at a gathering of Muslim is nothing but an exercise in deceit. Muslims are no strangers to deceit in India and elsewhere too.

Wednesday, February 19, 2014

 Is the Quran relevant to Muslims only? What about the Humanity?


Is the Quran only for Muslims? If God is the Lord of the worlds (Quran1:2) and the Prophet is described as the messenger for the worlds (Quran 21:107) and the Quran is introduced as a reminder to the worlds, (Quran 68:52) then what is the relevance of the Quranic message to the world? How can the world, Muslims and non-Muslims, alike, benefit from the universal message of a universal and compassionate God? Can non-Muslims practice divinely revealed values without acknowledging their original source and without adhering to the total divine call?

Introduction

The Quran, Muslims believe is the final testament God revealed to human beings through Prophet Muhammad, in the seventh century. They believe that that the Quran affirms everything that was revealed to all the previous messengers in the past, including Prophets Abraham, Ismail, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, and Jesus. The Quran recognizes the principle of inclusiveness when it says: "I have come to you, to attest the Law which was before me. And to make lawful to you part of what was (before) forbidden to you; I have come to you with a sign from your Lord. So fear Allah, and obey me." (Quran 3:50) The Quran also acknowledges that divine message has been sent to all in all languages and the Quran affirms the continuity of the divine message. "O ye People of the Book! Believe in what We have (now) revealed, confirming what was (already) with you, before We change the face and fame of some (of you) beyond all recognition, and turn them hind wards, or curse them as We cursed the Sabbath-breakers, for the decision of Allah, Must be carried out." (Quran 4:47)

The Quran acknowledges the common thread in all the divine messages when it says: "The same religion He has established for you as that which He enjoined on Noah - the which We have sent by inspiration to thee - and that We enjoined on Abraham, Moses, and Jesus: Namely, that you should remain steadfast in religion, and make no divisions therein: to those who worship other things than Allah, hard is the (way) to which you call them. Allah chooses to Himself those whom He pleases, and guides to Himself those who turn (to Him). (Quran 42:13)

The Muslims believe that the guidance in the Quran is for all time, and all people. Even though many Muslim scholars have often differed on the issue of giving a copy of the Quran to non-Muslims, quoting the Quranic verse that says "none shall touch, but those who are clean," (Quran 56:79) yet more serious among them believe that the verse refers to the purity and sanctity of the divine message emphasizing the fact that it is revealed by the one who is absolutely authentic (Allah) and delivered by the one who is sacred and pure (Angel Gabriel) and delivered by the one (Prophet Muhammad) who is innocent from committing any wrong in communicating the message.

In fact, the Quran addresses human beings as "Ya aiyuhal Nas" (O Humankind) directly 306 times and indirectly more than two thousand times in its over 6,000 verses. In contrast, the Quran specifically addresses Muslim men and women (Ya aiyuhal Muslimun/Muslimat/Muslimatun/etc.) by name only 49 times. How can anyone refuse to share a copy of the Quran with non-Muslims? In fact, the first revelation that the prophet received was first recited by the Prophet to non-Muslims.

Regardless, the Muslim scholarship, by and large, has inadvertently turned the Quran into a manifesto for Muslims only making the argument that the Quran is a book of guidance for Muslims primarily. On top of this, the use of the Quran has been limited to ceremonial recitation. Is there nothing for the non-Muslim creation of God in the book Muslims attribute to a Merciful and Compassionate God of all. Can a non-Muslim makes use of the guidance of the Quran while still remaining outside the fold of Islam? Can Islam be practiced by non-Muslims in its normative sense without adhering to its form ritual structure?

Contrary to what some Muslims might believe the fact is that many human beings, regardless of their relationship with Islam, have on their own reached conclusions that the Quran introduced to the world through revelation. In a way, many non-Muslims have shown a better understanding of the message of the Quran, even without fully identifying with Islam than shown by many Muslims.

For instance, the empiricism in modern natural and social sciences is a known reality of our epistemology. The Quran announced this maxim clearly when it said: "And pursue not that of which you have no knowledge; for every act of hearing, or of seeing or of (feeling in) the heart will be inquired into (on the Day of Reckoning). (Quran 17:36) In other words, one must use all methods of inquiry to come to a conclusion and decisions in all aspects of life must not be based on superstitions and hearsay.

There are five major divine ideas expounded in the Quran that human beings have now begun to realize as the essence of their humanity. They were there in other religious scriptures and they are defined in detail in the Quran, yet, humanity as a whole waited for almost 7,000 of its recorded human history to acknowledge their legitimacy and validity.

These ideas have constantly provided guidance to reformers and idealists regardless of their religious or ethnic backgrounds all over the world for centuries. What is ironic is that while acknowledging the supremacy of these ideas many Muslim groups and leaders in the Muslim world have often negated them through their writings or actions. Those five ideas are oneness or unity of humanity, the dignity of human beings, universalization of natural resources, justice and peace. No human society can live in a state of stability and progression without accepting these ideas and making efforts to live by them.

Oneness of humanity

The Quran places emphasis on the oneness of human beings. It introduces the idea of common human origin and ancestry at four different places and says that humans have their origin in a single cell or soul.

"O mankind! Reverence your Guardian-Lord, who created you from a single soul, created, of like nature, the mate, and from them, twain scattered (like seeds) countless men and women;- reverence Allah, through whom ye demand your mutual (rights), and (reverence) the wombs (that bore you): for Allah ever watches over you." (Quran 4:1)

"It is He Who hath produced you from a single soul: here is a place of sojourn and a place of departure: We detail Our signs for people who understand." (Quran 6:98)

"It is He Who created you from a single soul, and made the mate of like nature, in order that he might dwell with her (in love). When they are united, she bears a light burden and carries it about (unnoticed). When she grows heavy, they both pray to Allah their Lord, (saying): If Thou gives us a goodly child, we vow we shall (ever) be grateful." (Quran 7:189)

"He created you (all) from a single person: then created, of like nature, his mate; and he sent down for you eight head of cattle in pairs: He makes you, in the wombs of your mothers, in stages, one after another, in three veils of darkness. Such is Allah, your Lord, and Cherisher: to Him belongs (all) dominion. There is no god but He: then how are ye turned away (from your true Centre)?" (Quran 39:6)

Thus the purpose is to ensure that the unity of humanity is never compromised and the differences that exist among people are resolved through a process of mutual understanding on the basis of ideas that are divinely revealed.

"Mankind was one single nation, and Allah sent Messengers with glad tidings and warnings; and with them He sent the Book in truth, to judge between people in matters wherein they differed; but the People of the Book, after the clear Signs came to them, did not differ among themselves, except through selfish contumacy. Allah by His Grace guided the believers to the Truth, concerning that wherein they differed. For Allah guided whom He wills to a path that is straight." (Quran 2:213)

The Quran acknowledges the diversity in humanity, but described it as a functional aspect of existence and not structural.

"To you We sent the Scripture in truth, confirming the scripture that came before it, and guarding it in safety: so judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and follow not their vain desires, diverging from the Truth that has come to you. To each among you, we have prescribed a law and an open way. If Allah had so willed, He would have made you a single people, but (His plan is) to test you in what He has given you: so strive as in a race in all virtues. The goal of you all is to Allah. It is He that will show you the truth of the matters in which you dispute; (Quran 5:48)

The Quranic assertion about the oneness of humanity is a powerful message for all those who still want to live in their own tribal, national and ethnic cocoons without any respect and regard for the other. The Quran does not want a person to conceal one's identity by birth, but wants that identity to enhance inclusiveness rather than exclusiveness.

"O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise (each other). Verily the most honored of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And Allah has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things). (Quran 49:13)

The idea that despite differences in our DNAs and fingerprints, we all have a common origin and can relate with each other, accepting every human as part of our extended family, whether we are able to trace our bloodlines or not is in itself a powerful unifying idea, an idea whose time has finally come in a world that is shrinking every day.

Dignity of Human Beings

The Quran places great emphasis on the dignity of human beings, regardless of their gender or race or even status. It says: "We have bestowed dignity on the children of Adam; provided them with transport on land and sea; given them for sustenance things good and pure; and conferred on them special favors, above a great part of our creation." (Quran 17:70) 

Dignity comprises rights and duties. It means that all human beings are created equal by the One Creator, and no one is superior to another on the basis of his or her birth or family or tribe. It is only the divine that alone is the judge to decide who lived up to his/her dignified status accepting the dignity of the other. The dignity also means that human beings have a right to life, right to freedom of religion, right to freedom of lifestyle, right to labor, right to security and right to the family are secured, even if that means that human beings do not accept divine guidance. 
The Quran does not want people to deprive others of these rights because of their color, gender or even religion. The Quran does not give preference to one over the other. The Quran does not say that only Muslims or who have faith in God deserve dignity or rights that are associated with dignity. It talks in a broader term and declares that no one has a right to deny humans their dignity that is a God given right.

Not very long ago, the world had difficulty in realizing the validity of this Quranic message. People were discriminated on the basis of their ethnicity or gender or status and religious scholars and political experts were providing justification for these discrimination. A classic case of this denial of dignity can be found in India where according to religious scripture a group of people were categorized as low castes or untouchables because of their birth in a particular social group. Even though, India has banned that in its constitution and legally such a discrimination is punishable, yet it is still practiced widely in the country. In the United States, we had the "N" word for African-Americans in vogue for several centuries and is still uttered in several private sessions. But no one in the world today can argue for segregation and discrimination on the basis of race, religion,, gender etc. The world has begun to realize and implement the Quranic message of the dignity of humankind. This message is relevant in our time more than ever before, regardless whether Muslims practice it or not because it certainly can inspire people of all faith to stand with each other in defense of human dignity of all.

Universalization of Natural Resources

The third Quranic message relevant for humanity at large is its emphasis on the universality of natural resources. Earth, oceans, skies water, and wind are for the benefit of all. No one can monopolize them for their exclusive use. No one can use their access to these resources to deny others the rights bestowed to them. Thus the Quran states, "It is He Who has created for you all things that are on earth; moreover His design comprehended the heavens, for He gave order and perfection to the seven firmaments; and of all things He has perfect knowledge." (Quran 2:29)

The distribution of these human resources in a manner that would ensure the dignity and oneness of humanity is a major challenge for human beings. Wars have been fought for land and access to natural resources such as water, land or gas without realizing that none of these natural treasures were created by humans, yet human beings have always fought over their greed to control them.

The Quran explains that the purpose to provide these resources is to ensure that human beings are not deprived of their basic needs for survival. It asks human beings not to use them to exploit fellow human beings. Our world today has about 1.6 billion people who sleep hungry every night. Our world has over 60 percent of the population that earns less than a dollar a day. Malnutrition is common and so is homelessness. People are deprived of drinkable water even though there is plenty of fresh water resources. People are still forced to live on streets and under open skies even though there is plenty of land to provide housing to everyone.

In religious circles everyone talks about removing poverty or at least ensuring that people's basic needs are addressed. The Quranic message certainly gives guidance in this matter and invites people to work together to ensure that no one sleeps hungry and no one is homeless. The Quran addresses the issue of basic human needs in great details in verses 12 to 18 of chapter 90 when it explains what is this steep uphill ascent? Who else can tell you better than the Almighty? So listen: The uphill ascent is that a human should not only look after himself. Wherever he sees a human neck caught in any kind of subjugation or bondage, he should free it. That is to say, the first and foremost thing to do is to establish a system where no one is subdued by or subjugated to another. Everyone walks with his chin up, with total physical and mental freedom. (He should not have to follow and obey any Law except that of Allah the Almighty.) And during the period when some people take over all primary sources of subsistence and create a state of general distress and hunger, this system should look after the needs of those who, despite living among other people, feel lonely and helpless; or of the needs of those who have to labor hard for a morsel. They are the auspicious and prosperous people on the right path, enjoying the pleasures of life.

Justice for all

Justice is the buzz world in our modern vocabulary. The Quran not only emphasizes justice but also recommends a step above justice, i.e., working for the good of others at the expense of one's interest. On the other side are those who are also true to their faith. They always give preference to the needs of the newcomers, even if they themselves are indigent and living a life of hardship. (Quran 59:9) The Quran reminds that people who are likely to achieve prosperity are those who change their personalities and no longer push others aside to selfishly fulfill their own needs. Realizing that the other person's need is more demanding they voluntarily allow them to fulfill it first.

The Quran recommends a simple maxim for justice "O ye who believe! Stand out firmly for justice, as witnesses to Allah, even as against yourselves, or your parents, or your kin, and whether it be (against) rich or poor: for Allah can best protect both. Follow not the lusts (of your hearts), lest ye swerve, and if ye distort (justice) or decline to do justice, verily Allah is well- acquainted with all that ye do." (Quran 4:135)

"O ye who believe! stand out firmly for Allah, as witnesses to fair dealing, and let not the hatred of others to you make you swerve to wrong and depart from justice. Be just: that is next to piety: and fear Allah. For Allah is well-acquainted with all that ye do." (Quran 5:8)

Every human society accepts justice as its core value, yet we find that every human society violates its own declared values and promotes injustice on the basis of divisions that people have created among themselves. So much inequality, indignity and denial of basic human rights takes place in our world simply because people tend to view justice for others as not binding. However, without adhering to justice, it is impossible to think of dignity, unity or universality of humanity.

Peace is the goal

The ultimate goal of humans in this world is to secure a peaceful human society so that a peaceful family can protect the interests of a peaceful individual for achieving his or her true potential in deliberating on the purpose of this life and preparing for a life that is eternal in every sense of the term. The unity of humanity, the dignity, the justice and the universality of human resources pave the path for peace. They liberate humans from the mundane and the profane and take them into the realm of sublime and sacred. They ensure that that human beings reconcile between their greed and their need.

Defining the purpose of his guidance the Quran says that "through which God shows unto all that seek His goodly acceptance the paths leading to peace and, by His grace, brings them out of the depths of darkness into the light and guides them onto a straightway. (Quran 5:16)

The Quran repeats the message several times that the purpose of human efforts is to enable humans to dwell in an abode of peace, "theirs shall be an abode of peace with their Sustainer; and He shall be near unto them in result of what they have been doing." (Quran 6:127) and explains "And [know that] God invites [man] unto the abode of peace, and guides him that wills [to be guided] onto a straight way." (Quran 10:25)

Thus, the message of the Quran is universal and eternal. The divine sets the standards through messages delivered to human beings. It was left to individuals to seek the path of unity, dignity, universality, justice, and peace, not the path to argue with each who is better than the other or who would qualify for the grace of God and who would not. Let the world not deprive itself of the benefits of the divine guidance because of the sectarian, myopic and often arrogant behavior on the part of some Muslim groups. Let the world make use of these values that are universal and would help everyone. Muslims should also not shy away from joining those who work for these values even if their proponents happen to be those who profess other faiths or no faith.