SACW | 11 Oct 2004
sacw
aiindex at mnet.fr
Sun Oct 10 19:14:03 CDT 2004
South Asia Citizens Wire | 11 October, 2004
via: www.sacw.net
[1] Pakistan:
- The sectarian monster (Edit, Daily Times)
- Pakistan's schisms spill into present (Zaffar Abbas)
[2] Bangladesh: People, police thwart Ahmadiyya
mosque raid - This is how it should be
[3] India: Bloodthirsty Honour - In India,
adults may vote, but they cannot marry who they
choose
(Githa Hariharan)
[4] India: A Plea To The Press - Please Spare us the AIMPLB Edicts (C.M. Naim)
[5] India: Education, Secularism and Human Values (Asghar Ali Engineer)
[6] India: RSS man Ram Madhav's US talk tour
sparks a debate: should he have been invited?
(Seema Sirohi)
[7] India: Shankar Guha Niyogi & Chattisgarh (Deepak Upreti)
[8] Upcoming events in the UK:
(i) "Communalism In South Asia and Its Impact In
Europe" (London, 16 October, 2004)
(ii) "Women in South Asia, Middle East, Europe: Resisting
Patriarchy, State And Religion Based Violence" (London, October 15, 2004)
--------------
[1]
The Daily Times - October 10, 2004 | Editorial
THE SECTARIAN MONSTER
Multan massacre is the latest in the spate of
sectarian violence that has hit a new high taking
the death toll this year to 165 - one of the
highest in two decades. A bomb going off on
Thursday morning killed at least 40 people and
injured more than 100 others. Most of the victims
were returning to their homes after participating
in a congregation held to coincide with the death
anniversary of Sipha-e-Sahaba leader Maulana Azam
Tariq - third leader of the banned organisation
to be assassinated.
It is too early to say whether the murder of a
leading pro-Taliban Sunni cleric and his
associate in Karachi on Saturday is related.
Nonetheless, some reports suggest that the
Karachi incident could be a sequel to the Multan
attack.
The Multan attack was all the more remarkable in
that it followed a deadly attack in a Sialkot
mosque and has prompted the government to deploy
the army. The deployment came after thousands of
Sunnis demonstrated outside Nishtar Hospital and
chanted slogans against the government and the
Shias. It may have prevented a Sialkot-like riot
where angry mobs attacked and damaged several
government offices.
Initial reports suggested that there were two
explosions in Multan: a car bomb and a
time-device planted on a motorcycle. Later,
however, Pir Riaz Hussain Qureshi, the district
nazim, said there was only one blast.
Interestingly, the nazim is himself facing an
enquiry ordered by the Punjab government which is
questioning the wisdom of allowing the
congregation in the first place. "The district
government had not informed the provincial
government about the congregation," said Hassan
Waseem Afzal, the home secretary. According to
another report, a similar enquiry is expected
against Mian Amer Mahmood, the Lahore city
district nazim for his no-objection certificate
for similar gatherings in Lahore.
The Home Department has prepared a list of 679
people linked to sectarian violence, under
Section 11-EE of the Anti-Terrorist Act 2002.
These men must report to the local station house
officer (SHO) every evening and will need his
permission for leaving the precinct. They will be
monitored closely.
In Islamabad, Interior Minister Sherpao said the
federal government had issued instructions
following the Sialkot attack to provincial
governments to take appropriate security
measures. Ironically, certain officials had said
after the Sialkot attack that they were caught
'off guard'. They said they had been 'expecting'
something in Multan or Lahore. Sialkot had never
been the target previously of a major sectarian
strike. The 'expectation' and the Interior
Ministry advice, it seems, were not enough to
prevent the Multan attack.
In the past such attacks have resulted in two
kinds of government action. One, the
sacking/transfer of a few officers held
'responsible' for the security lapse and two, a
number of new 'security measures' that have no
real effect on the country's law and order but
make life more miserable for the common man.
Invoking Section 144 to ban pillion riding and
outlawing assembly of five or more people are
typical.
After the Sialkot attack, Chief Minister Chaudhry
Pervaiz Elahi had suspended from service the
Sialkot police chief and two other senior
officers. In a law and order review meeting, he
had maintained the district police officer (DPO)
and the deputy superintendent of police (DSP)
concerned were responsible for peace and security
in the district. The action was not matched in
Multan.
For his part, Interior Minister Aftab Khan
Sherpao told the press: "We are beefing up
security ... our effort is to ensure the safety
of all citizens. The government has directed the
entire security apparatus to remain in a state of
high alert, because of the threat posed by
elements trying to destabilise the country
through acts of terrorism."
The 'effort' included a ban on religious
gatherings, exempting only prayer congregations
in mosques. "The federal government has decided
to advise the provincial governments to ban
processions, religious gatherings and
congregations until further orders, except for
gatherings for prayers inside mosques," Mr
Sherpao told reporters. Gatherings can still be
held with prior permission from the district
nazim.
But the Sialkot strike was on a 'prayer
congregation inside a mosque' which is still
permitted. And the district nazim had granted
'permission' for the Multan rally. This makes it
look like the ban is more relevant to the
political opposition. The MMA has called for
agitation in Ramzan against the government
decision to allow the president to keep his army
job beyond the December 31 and the ARD is shaping
up for a protest movement of its own - against
the 17th constitutional amendment.
While the Sialkot and Multan attacks targeted
different communities, there are certain
similarities. Both bombs, for instance, used
explosive material of Indian origin. But the
powder, used also in fireworks manufacture, is
readily available. Also, experts said, greater
than usual amount of explosive was used in both
cases.
This tends to help those pointing fingers at the
'usual suspects' (the so-called Indo-Israeli or
RAW-Mosad nexus). Sectarian violence in Pakistan
has always been blamed on external forces. If it
is not 'the American hand' and 'the Jewish lobby'
behind the massacres, it is 'the Hindu element',
'the Afghan factor', 'the Iranian design', 'the
Saudi finance' - even 'the Al Qaeda network'. One
of the factors sustaining sectarian violence for
decades is our failure to look within for the
causes and culprits. Blaming outsiders is easy
but hardly solves a problem.
There is a pressing need for admitting that the
'Muslims cannot kill Muslims' notion is not
helpful in combating sectarian crime. It is high
time we realised that we have a 'situation'. The
only time we have had a degree of success in
dealing with sectarianism has been when we have
dealt with it in an objective manner. There are
no two ways about it. *
o o o o
BBC News
PAKISTAN'S SCHISMS SPILL INTO PRESENT
By Zaffar Abbas
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3724082.stm
______
[2]
The Daily Star - October 11, 2004 | Editorial
[Bangladesh] PEOPLE, POLICE THWART AHMADIYYA MOSQUE RAID
THIS IS HOW IT SHOULD BE
http://www.thedailystar.net/2004/10/11/d41011020222.htm
______
[3]
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1041010/asp/opinion/story_3848937.asp
The Telegraph - October 10, 2004
BLOODTHIRSTY HONOUR
- In India, adults may vote, but they cannot marry who they choose
SECOND THOUGHTS / GITHA HARIHARAN
Heshu Yones, 16, killed by her father who
believed she had become too Westernized. He was
sentenced to life by the Old Bailley criminal
court
Eve teasing. Voluntary sati. And now, honour
killings. These oxymoron-ridden phrases wreak
violence on our language every day. They also
mirror flesh-and-blood violence. Coercion,
assault or murders continue to be exactly that,
no matter how much they are whitewashed with
euphemisms about teasing; no matter how well they
are dressed up with qualifiers like voluntary and
honour.
In the contemporary definition of an honour
killing, a woman or a man, or the couple, are
victimized for marrying outside their caste or
community. It is like a familiar script with the
wrong ending. Every other film made in India has
a couple in love who are not allowed to marry.
Invariably, whether the difference between boy
and girl is class, caste or religion, the end is
happy. The marriage takes place, and the
narrow-minded opponents of the marriage benefit
from a lesson on the equalizing powers of love.
Our transgressing young lovers in real life find
the story often ends quite differently. Their
marriages lead to punishing ostracism, and to
violence in a sickening variety of forms. A
convention against "honour" killings and violence
held in Delhi earlier this year identified some
of the types of punishment the couple may be
subject to. Public lynching. Or murder. Or,
taking a leaf out of the case of "voluntary
sati," murder camouflaged as suicide - say by
forcing the victim to drink poison. Less drastic
than murder but almost as painful is a long list
of honour-driven violence: sexual assault on the
women members of the accused family, usually
belonging to the lower caste or the "other
community" as "revenge;" public beating,
stripping, blackening of the face; shaving of the
head; forcing the couple or their families to
drink urine or eat excrement; incarceration, huge
fines, social boycott or being driven out of the
village.
What is this terrible "honour" that wreaks such
pain and terror on people simply because two
young people have exercised their right to choose
their partner? It's an honour that tends to
attach itself to rigid codes, usually caste or
religious codes. It also tends to be a code
formulated by the male elite so their "honour"
can flourish in the patriarchal framework. This
is the sort of honour that celebrates women
committing jawhar or mass sati; I remember an
obnoxious sound and light show I took my children
to years ago in Gwalior which placed the
achievements of Tansen and women committing
"suicide" on an equally glorious footing.
It is a useful thing to perpetuate a tradition of
martyrdom, especially when women's bodies are
vulnerable to being viewed as the vessels of
national honour. It was this unholy honour that
provided the motive for otherwise "normal" men to
kill their own sisters and wives and mothers
during the Partition - "disappearances" and
murders which have been covered by a conspiracy
of silence, and by the more acceptable belief
that these women were abducted or killed by men
from the other side. In her book The Other Side
of Silence, Urvashi Butalia takes on this myth
that the perpetrators of violence were always
"outsiders". She writes about a man she
interviewed in Amritsar, Mangal Singh, whose
family killed seventeen of its women and
children. He refuses to use the word killed; he
says they became "martyrs" in keeping with Sikh
pride. The women, he says, were willing to become
martyrs. "The real fear was one of dishonour."
But, asks Butalia, who had the pride and the
fear? It is not a question Mangal Singh was
willing to examine. Similarly, in Borders and
Boundaries: Women in India's Partition, Ritu
Menon records the account of a partition
survivor, Durga Rani. In this account, two types
of honour killings occur: one in anticipation of
dishonour; the other as a way to cope with
dishonour. Consider, on the one hand: "In the
villages of Head Junu, Hindus threw their young
daughters into wells, dug trenches and buried
them alive. Some were burnt to death, some were
made to touch electric wires to prevent the
Muslims touching them." On the other hand, Durga
Rani gives us an idea of what happened to many
women who had been abandoned after being raped
and disfigured. They could not be "kept" any
longer because their "character" was now spoilt.
In some cases, as in that of a girl who was raped
by ten or more men, the only way to deal with the
dishonour was murder; the girl, says Durga Rani,
was burnt by her father.
All these years after Partition, this
dishonourable honour still stalks the land,
wreaking its barbaric violence on both men and
women, but preferably on women. Most cases are
reported from Punjab, Haryana and parts of
western Uttar Pradesh. The statistics are
disturbing; twenty-three such murders were
reported during 2002 and 2003 in Muzaffarnagar
alone. Thirty-five young couples were declared
"missing". And in Punjab and Haryana, one out of
every ten murders is an honour killing. In most
of the cases where the girl is from an upper
caste, the boy is the target of violence, usually
by the girl's family. Often, girls who are
murdered for "destroying the honour of the
family" are cremated without any legal
formalities and the deaths concealed.
Behind the statistical wall is a collection of
stories that tell of violence and fear unleashed
on the basis of a shameful rationale. In
Hoshiarpur, Punjab, twenty-two-year old Geeta
Rani, a Rajput woman, married Jasvir, the son of
the only Jat family in the village. Her parents
did not object to the match. But the Rajputs in
Jasvir's village, including a suspended police
officer, decided to "teach him a lesson" for
marrying one of "their" women.
Within two months of the marriage, he was killed
after his hands and legs were cut off. One hand
was thrown into Jasvir's aunt's house. Now, the
widowed Geeta and her widowed mother-in-law live
in fear, struggling to pay security guards to
keep them safe. "Not even the nightmare of the
1984 riots was this bad," says the mother-in-law.
In Jhajjar, a Jat woman from Talav village
married a Dalit. She was forced to return to her
father's home, and there both she and her sister
were murdered. So were a Dalit woman and a man
who were accused of helping the girl to elope.
The villagers who recounted the story were clear
about one thing: the administration was careful
to protect the upper castes.
Several of these cases illustrate not only the
violation of the right to choose a marriage
partner, but also the role caste panchayats play
in perpetuating illegal and inhuman social codes.
In other states - Gujarat being a good example -
increased communalization has led to more
intolerance, and more violence in cases of
Hindu-Muslim marriages. In a country that is
blessed with all kinds of communities,
intermarriage is not only a constitutional right
of every adult citizen, but also the inevitable
way to celebrate the bonds among us. There's very
little point in sending our children to schools
or allowing them to vote - in short, in
pretending they are adults - if they cannot marry
who they choose.
______
[4]
http://www.outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodname=20041007&fname=aimplb&sid=1
Outlookindia.com - October 7, 2004
A PLEA TO THE PRESS
C.M. NAIM
Please Spare Us The AIMPLB Edicts
The latest inanity from the head of the All India
Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB)-on family
planning, no less-only goes to show how
irrelevant the organization is and how
irresponsible its president can be. As the press
reports had it:: "Board president Maulana Rabey
Hasan Nadvi said "Allah ne jiska paida hona tai
kiya hai usko rokna theek naheen hai" (It is not
proper to stop the birth of those whom God has
destined to be born). He termed adopting family
planning as "gair zaroori" (not necessary).'
I am not surprised that 'our lord and master'-for
that is what maulana means-did not think it fit
to mention even incidentally what the Prophet of
Islam neither approved nor prohibited but left to
people's judgment, namely 'azl or coitus
interruptus.
'Lords and masters' don't seek to enlighten
people, and far be it from them to try and
lighten people's burden. Their only concern is
that they must appear in full and sole
authority-all the time. And so when the president
was reminded of his lapse, he reportedly said
that while 'azl was allowed in Islam it was the
'new technologies' that were not allowed.
I wish the reporter had then asked: what about
the new technologies that save people's lives?
Are they also 'prohibited innovations'? Are you
telling Muslims not to seek benefit from them
because 'Allah ne jiska marna tai kiya hai usko
rokna theek naheen hai' (It's not proper to stop
the death of those whom God has destined to die)?
I doubt if any of these 'lords and masters' put
that much trust in God. (Only mystics and other
true men of God do that.) Medicine and medical
treatment of the latest kind, the maulanas will
assuredly declare, are most zaruuri. And, no
doubt, they will then remind us of the Prophet's
remark to a bedouin that he should first tether
his camel securely and only afterward put his
trust in God. Heads they win, tails we lose,
that's the way it goes with these learned men.
In any case, I truly fear there was a different
motive behind the Maulana's statement, and a
mischievous one, to say the least. According to
the newspaper report, 'When Maulana Rabey's
attention was drawn towards the success of family
planning in Iran, he said there was no need for
Muslims in India to follow the edicts of other
countries.
"Muslims in Iran are different from Muslims in
India," he said.' Now the letter urging the Board
to give some consideration to the issue of family
planning was written by Maulana Kalbe Sadiq, a
Shi'ah scholar who lives only about three miles
away from the Nadva where Maulana Rabey resides.
Is he not Indian and Muslim enough for the
President of the AIMPLB? Much to my regret and
shame I fear that may well be the case. And had
the rector
of Nadva been more forthcoming he could possibly
have said: 'Iranians are Shi'ahs, and I am a
Sunni; I do not regard them as Muslims.' He would
still have been perverse but, nevertheless,
honest to himself.
As is well-known to those who read Urdu, many
people associated with the Nadva have long
engaged in anti-Iran and anti-Shi'ah polemic and
propaganda. For example Maulana Manzoor Nu'mani,
who was much encouraged by Maulana Ali Mian, the
former rector of Nadva and the present rector's
uncle. The latter even wrote a highly admiring
introduction to the former's most vitriolic book,
Irani Inqilab, Imam Khomeini aur Shi'iyat. Thanks
to Saudi patronage, Wahabism of the worst kind
has spread in South Asia, and since 1979 it has
included a prominent trend of anti-Iran and
anti-Shi'ah sentiment. Its horrific results have
been evident in Pakistan for some time. The chief
reason it has not so blatantly showed itself in
India is the secular stance of the Indian state,
no matter how faulty the latter may seem
sometimes.
But this sectarian poison remains a strong
undercurrent in the Muslim religious elite, even
in such a seemingly peaceful movement as the
Tablighi Jama'at. 'Live and let live' is what
most Muslims, like most of their compatriots,
follow in their daily lives. Sadly, it's a rare
religious 'leader' who does so now.
We must never forget that AIMPLB brought itself
into prominence by blocking the pitifully small
financial relief that India's Supreme Court had
granted to an elderly Muslim divorcee, Shah Bano.
The Board succeeded because Prime Minister Rajiv
Gandhi and a coterie of people around him chose
political expediency over social justice.
(The same bunch then unlocked the doors in
Ayodhya, thus opening a second Pandora's box.)
Since then the Board has gained a totally
misplaced importance only due to the attention it
has received from the press.
This fact cannot be overemphasized. Should the
reporters stop going to the Board for a change,
it would immediately become
clear that Indian Muslims have diverse-in some
matters, even disparate-ways and opinions. They
go about their lives peaceably just like other
Indians, and when they need guidance in any
matter where they feel a religious perspective is
needed they ask someone locally. They then follow
or reject the given advice much as they feel.
They do not rush to the Board for guidance. A
vast majority of Indian Muslims may not even know
that it exists.
The ratio of women to men in the Muslim
population in India is roughly 9 to 10. We hear
ad nauseum from these Muslim 'leaders',
particularly from those who sit in Delhi, that
Muslims should be given representation in every
sphere-e.g. jobs, college admissions, and
legislative seats-proportionate to their
percentage in India's population. The same
people, however, turn mute if it is suggested
that Muslim women should be given proportionate
representation in all Muslim waqf authorities and
educational institutions, and, yes, on the AIMPLB
too.
After all most of the issues the maulanas of the
Board pontificate upon expressly effect women. If
questioned, they will no doubt respond, 'There
are not enough qualified women.' Unfortunately
the press never asks these men: whose fault is
it, and what steps have you, the masters of
Deoband and Nadva, taken to ameliorate the
situation? How many Muslim women have you trained
in religious learning? To put it bluntly, Muslim
religious trusts and schools have abysmally
failed to serve Muslim women despite the fact
that women constitute almost one half of the
population whose support these institutions draw
upon. Does that bother 'our lords and masters'?
Shouldn't it?
How obdurate the Board has been becomes clear if
we examine its act of commission concerning
Muslim marriages and its act of omission
concerning the use of mosque spaces by Muslim
women. The first issue is very much in the news
presently in India and not for the first time,
while the second is less so. It is quite
prominent an issue now in the United States.
However, the issue first appeared twice in Kerala
a few years back, then came up in Tamil Nadu and
also in Lucknow. It is likely to become more
prominent with the passage of time.
As is well known, marriage in Islam is a legal
contract and not a sacrament. It does not entail
a declaration that the two persons have been
'joined by God' and therefore none should
separate them. The ceremony requires neither the
presence of a mulla nor the premises of a mosque.
The only requirements are that the two parties
must consent to the marriage freely, and that the
groom should pay a mehr or bride-money to the
bride-not to her parents-before the marriage is
consummated.
Needless to say, in the name of 'tradition' or
'local practice'-why do they always favour the
groom?-the two requirements have been diluted
beyond recognition to serve the purpose of Muslim
patriarchy. Now any non-adult female can be given
away in marriage by her father. In fact, even an
adult female cannot now give or deny her consent
directly but must have a vakil to represent her.
As for the requirement of the mehr being paid
directly and promptly to the bride, it can now be
delayed, paid only partially, 'forgiven' by the
wife, set too low to be of any use, set too high
to be realistically payable, or simply litigated
out of existence.
Don't try asking the Board members about mehr; it
doesn't interest them, though it is of course
critical for one-half of the Muslim population
they allegedly represent. It is the male
prerogative of 'giving' a divorce that is of
utmost concern to 'our lords and masters' of the
Board.
Remember, they originally came together
exclusively as a band of men, and only to protect
a man from paying to his divorced wife what the
law of the nation required. Later the Board
expanded itself grudgingly and included a handful
of women. However it continued to act the way it
always had. It took its own sweet time to discuss
a uniform and equitable marriage contract, then
scuttled what the efforts of those few women had
brought about. Here is how the logic of these
'lords and masters' worked: it is not very nice
when men divorce their wives by saying talaq
three times but they must have the right to do
so; on the other hand, women may have a legal
right in Islam to get a divorce-note that they
can only 'get' a divorce, not 'give' a divorce-it
won't be very nice to make that right actually
enforceable through the marriage contract!
Let us now turn to the second issue: should
Muslim women participate in congregational
prayers and occupy mosque spaces on an equal
footing with Muslim men? Muslims do not need a
priest or imam to fulfill the fundamental
requirement of five daily prayers.
Any believer can pray by herself or himself.
However, Muslims are urged to say the required
prayers collectively-in jama'a. Collective
prayers led by an imam are considered more
rewarding religiously. According to some hadith,
twenty-five times more rewarding. The imam,
however, can be any ordinary Muslim who is
perceived by the group or congregation as being
more virtuous or 'knowing more of the Qur'an'
than the rest.
In other words, no specifically ordained or
trained person is required. Unlike Christianity,
there are neither monks nor priests in Islam.
Muslim women of the Prophet's time freely
attended the prayers in his mosque. At his most
restrictive he is reported to have said: 'Do not
prevent your women from visiting the mosques, but
their houses are better for them.' In another
hadith, he reportedly said: 'Allow women to visit
the mosque at night.' Clearly the women of Medina
attended the prayers in the Prophet's mosque
without any restriction. Were they assigned a
permanent separate space within that mosque? I
doubt if that was the case. After all, Muslim men
and Muslim women even now perform the rituals of
Hajj side by side-the women with fully exposed
faces-both groups observing the same rules of
modesty and humility. What for centuries has been
allowed in God's 'House' could not have been
prohibited in the Prophet's mosque.
According to a well-known hadith preserved in the
Sunan of Abu Dawud and accepted as valid by all
Sunni Muslims, the Prophet was asked by a woman,
Umm Waraqah, if she could have the call for
prayers said at her house, i.e. if she could hold
congregational prayers at her house. Apparently
she lived at some distance from the Prophet's
mosque in Medina.
The Prophet not only gave her the permission but
also asked her to lead the inmates of her house
in prayers. The 'inmates' of her house included
at least two males, the muaddhin who made the
call and the one slave who later killed her. This
is what the late great scholar Dr. Muhammad
Hamidullah had to say about this hadith:
'I am not prepared to accept that [Umm Waraqah]
was made the imam of only the women. The word ahl
used in the hadith is not restricted to mean
women alone. [She had a muaddhin and several
slaves] Obviously the slaves performed their
prayers with her as the imam. In short her imamat
was not for women alone, it was also for men.'
We also know that two of the Prophet's wives,
Hazrat 'A'isha and Hazrat Umm Salama, are
reported to have held congregational
prayers-though exclusively for women-which they
separately led. These congregational prayers must
have been performed within the Prophet's mosque,
for that is where the two venerable ladies lived.
(I was pleasingly surprised to read recently that
the late Maulana Maududi's wife used to hold
congregational prayers for women at their house
in Karachi, where she led the prayers and read
the khutba.)
It would appear then that the existing severe
exclusion of women from mosque spaces developed
later. It could have been due to any number of
reasons which are really not of any concern. The
question for us is: are women to be denied those
spaces now and forever? A couple of years back, a
group of women in Kerala raised this issue twice
and, unless I remember wrongly, in one case they
were able to prevail. I would, however, put a
more modest question before the dignitaries of
the Board: if congregational prayers are indeed
religiously more rewarding then what have you
done to ensure that Muslim women of your own
acquaintance and neighborhood obtain that reward?
I would be the first to applaud them if they have
in fact held or encouraged similar all-women
congregational prayers at their homes and at the
mosques they control.
One thing, however, I am quite sure of. Despite
their piously urging Muslim males to pray
together and thus garner a greater reward, these
'lords and masters' of the Board will no doubt
regard my question as 'un-Islamic', and the idea
of Muslim females having the same right as the
males asinful bid'at or 'innovation'-the worst
abuse in their rich vocabulary. That is what they
always do, for that is all they seem to have
learned to do. They only command, deny, reject,
or denounce. Don't expect them to share,
co-operate, compromise, and give-and-take. Theirs
is not an examined life; they believe only in
unexamined acceptance, both for themselves and
others.
The other strong belief they seem to share is in
the exceptional quality of their genes. Knowledge
and authority are hereditary traits and male
prerogatives for these 'lords and masters'.
Consider the Nadva itself. A school started by an
organization of Muslim scholars from all over
India, since 1915 it has mostly been controlled
by the members of just one family. Will the
present rector care to inform the Muslim
community what effort he or his three elders ever
made to educate Muslim women in religious
knowledge? Are not Muslim males and females
together enjoined to seek 'ilm? And shouldn't an
'alim be fair and equitable in sharing his
knowledge with the members of his community?
Again a cry will most likely go up: no, that will
be a bid'at. We will be told that religious
learning comes in two kinds, of which only one,
that of a very limited nature, is necessary for
women to fulfill their 'assigned' role in the
world.Sadly, but not surprisingly, with regard to
the propagation of even that limited 'ilm to
Muslim women the record of the Nadva and the
assorted individuals controlling the Board is
shamefully poor. Does that bother them? Not at
all. They have greater things to worry about,
such as making sure that an elderly Muslim woman
should not get any aid under the 'prevention of
indigence' clauses of the Indian Penal Code.
The AIMPLB is not a representative body; nor is
it a democratic body. It created itself, and its
members have held on to their seats to serve
their own agendas. More ominously over the years
it has tried to expand its self-proclaimed
authority-vide its brief flirting with the
perilous idea of an out-of-court settlement of
the Babri Mosque issue. In its existence the
Board has done nothing to improve the lot of
Muslim women who constitute roughly one-half of
the community. Many of its members have little
individual distinction of their own, and are
there only because they gained some hereditary
position. It is about time the Indian press gave
Indian Muslims a break. Ignoring the Board may be
best, but that may not be possible. In that case,
the press should give the AIMPLB only the due it
actually deserves within the secular polity of
the Indian nation-one among many Muslim
organizations and not one bit more authoritative
than others.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. M. Naim is Professor. Emeritus, South Asian
Languages & Civilizations, University of Chicago
______
[5]
EDUCATION, SECULARISM AND HUMAN VALUES
Asghar Ali Engineer
(Secular Perspective October 1-15, 2004)
Education is highly valued in modern society. One
cannot survive without it in this world. One must
attain higher educational levels if one has to
progress and be economically well off. Thus in
modern times education is more a means for higher
economic status than search for truth or search
for meaning of life. It means equipping oneself
with more and more information than knowledge
(what we traditionally called (gyan or ‘ilm).
No wonder than that information technology has
acquired such importance in contemporary world.
It is also referred to as knowledge industry thus
dragging knowledge to the level of information
and reducing it to an industry, a profit making
venture. Thus knowledge has lost its sanctity and
it is no more a quest for truth, but for money.
It is no more a goal but an instrument, not an
end but a means.
Also, as the well- known American philosopher
Herbert Marcuse aptly said our universities are
no more centres of knowledge but have become
centres of acknowledgement and they are no more
centres of cognition but are centres of
recognition. Excellence in knowledge and
learning is no more encouraged in these
institutions. Competition for jobs has become
its aim.
Today education is controlled by the Government
on one hand, and by the rich, on the other. Both
have their own objectives and agenda. While
government tries to promote its political
ideology the rich tries to enrich themselves. In
country like India the government is still a
major player in the field of education. It
determines what to teach and prescribes text-
books. Thus the education is largely controlled
by government, both central and state. Its role
is most crucial in deciding the quality of
education.
We are a secular state in India but our education
is far from being secular in content. Our text
books both at primary and higher levels are
thoroughly contaminated by communal outlook. We
often blame the British rulers for their divide
and rule policy but our text books even 57 years
after independence is divisive in character with
some honourable exception. It systematically
cultivates communal outlook and creates hatred
against minority communities.
It is regrettable that despite such sustained
controversy against communalised textbook there
are no concerted efforts to change them so that
these textbooks can become a dynamic instrument
for promoting secularism and secular values and
respect for all religions, languages and
cultures. Our text books represent majoritarian
outlook and fail to strengthen pluralist values.
Pluralism needs to be promoted with vigour today
in our country to fight communal ethos.
Today in most of the schools we find pictures of
Hindu gods and goddesses and slokas from Hindu
scriptures. Recently I visited a school run by
Mumbai Municipal Corporation and found entire
atmosphere suffused with of Hindu religion. There
was no representation of any other religion at
all. Not a single picture or quotation from Bible
or Qur’an or Sikhism. This obviously discourages
children of other communities to study n such
atmosphere where they feel totally alienated.
Our aim through education should be to cultivate
critical thinking. No school even remotely
reaches this goal of education. All our schools
cultivate conservative unthinking outlook. The
students are encouraged to imitate traditions
rather than develop faculty to critically
evaluate. The teachers themselves come from
highly conservative environment and pass it on to
their students. Most of them do not even teach,
just read out from textbooks so that students can
memorise and pass the examination.
The Latin American educationist Father Paul
Ferear stressed interactive method of teaching so
that students can discuss and raise questions on
a subject. This method can develop students
thinking and critical faculty. What our teachers
do is to deposit information in the minds of
their students and totally discourage any
critical discussion. Also, real learning involves
quest for truth, quest for knowledge. Our
educational institutions are simply not equipped
to promote this kind of learning.
Our educational institutions do not cultivate
universal humanitarian outlook. They perpetrate
narrow sectarian thinking. These institutions
promote majoritarian ethos and a sense of
superiority in majority culture and majority
religion. It holds good for our entire
subcontinent which includes India, Pakistan and
Bangla Desh. We simply take pride in our past and
fail to build our future. We stress cultivating
superiority of our respective religion and
culture rather than universality and humanity.
We do not even stress core values of our religion
and its spirituality. We simply promote certain
rituals, customs and traditions. We do not
promote love but hatred of others.
Our textbooks still promote caste superiority and
contempt for low castes. The exposures recently
of some Gujarat textbooks were shocking, to say
the least. A crow was likened with a safai kamgar
i.e. with dalits. Thus dalits are presented as
ugly. How can we ever cultivate humanism in our
students. At every step in our education
institutions we stress discrimination on the
basis of caste and creed.
No wonder than that educated people are more
communal than poor and illiterate persons who are
found more humane. All these prejudices and
stereotypical thinking is acquired through
educational system. When the BJP government came
to power it tried its best to inject pride in the
Hindu past and demonised the Muslim past. Past
associated with one particular religion is
glorified and the one associated with other
religion is demonised. This is not history, it is
its mockery.
Human society, past or present, has always been
full of conflict and violence. It is not religion
which makes a society good or bad as often
thought. It is human beings who promote good or
evil, depending on their interests. There has not
been a single era in history, which was without
conflict whatever religion it was associated
with. It is human interests which determine the
dynamics of a society. Unfortunately it is human
interests, not religious values which occupy the
centre stage of history.
If we have to build modern India our education
system must be thoroughly reformed. Unfortunately
no government has such political will, whatever
their proclamations. Without such thorough
cleansing we cannot promote genuine man outlook
among our people. There is so much communal
polarisation today in our society thanks to our
education system and communal propaganda.
Today we find fundamentalism and communalism
among lower middle classes as well as upper
classes though for different reasons. Among lower
middle classes and backward castes and dalits as
they go to municipal and government schools and
acquire narrow and sectarian outlook through the
textbooks and prevailing atmosphere. And as far
as upper classes are concerned they concentrate
more on their career through acquiring degrees
and building professional future. They have
neither time and aptitude for spiritual quest for
philosophical truth.
These people do not mind exploiting
fundamentalism for their own interests. Many
highly successful professionals are today joining
communal organisations in their search for power
and self. They exploit lower class and lower
caste people through their narrow outlook and
religious sectarianism. This is what happened on
large scale in Gujarat. The upper caste and rich
Hindus used dalits and backward castes for their
political objectives and won assembly elections.
The political exploitation of caste and religion
has reached its apex in the quest by the rich and
powerful for power. We had the ideal of a
casteless society but no one even dreams of it
today let alone try to build such society. We
have no more desire to combat communalism, let
alone build a secular nationhood. Those in search
for power leave no opportunity to exploit caste
and communal ethos. Babri Masjid-Ram Mandir
controversy is its classical example.
We, with all our modernity are not prepared to
give equal status to women. Our textbooks still
glorify women as ideal housewives and good
mothers. Our laws, Hindu or Muslim, are unable to
give women justice in the name of religion and
tradition. Tradition is more dear to us than
justice. Our traditions must be upheld even if
they result in grossest form of exploitation.
Muslim personal law board refuses to abolish
triple divorce or accept nikahnama whatever the
suffering of Muslim women.
And our educated people uphold such injustices in
the name of identity and our politicians refuse
to change laws for fear of loosing political
power. Politicians would not reform education
system either as rational and humane outlook will
make people more aware of their rights and will
strengthen desire for better and more just
society. But to ensure better future and just
society where pluralist ethos and minority rights
are respected there is no other go but to
thoroughly overhaul our education system. We are
otherwise doomed to live with violent conflicts
and bloodbath destroying our future and keep us
stuck in the quagmire of our past.
Centre for Study of Society and Secularism
Mumbai:- 400 055.
______
[6]
Outlook Magazine - Oct 18, 2004
RSS - HURRICANE RAM
RSS man Ram Madhav's US talk tour sparks a debate: should he have been invited?
Seema Sirohi
In the end, Ram Madhav, national spokesman of the
RSS, simply self-destructed in front of his
university audiences with incoherent tumbles and
bizarre leaps of mind. But the anti-Muslim
message was clear in his narrative that careened
from laments about high birth rates to rants
about two theocracies pushing into India's
borders from the east and west. Profusion and
invasion were threatening democracy itself in
India. He threw in Hitlerian terminology and
regressive pronouncements about women to complete
the montage. And, you didn't have to be a
'pseudo-secularist' or a 'Commie' to be outraged
by the casual manner in which he joked about
Gujarat.
Last week, Madhav spoke at Johns Hopkins
University (JHU), accompanied by a band of
bodyguards. The Madhav brigade intimidated,
abused and hissed at student protesters handing
out flyers saying "Stop Helping Hate. Stop RSS"-a
perfectly normal activity
on American streets and campuses. But apparently
not for the RSS. A Madhav supporter snatched the
flyers, crumpled them and threw them in a
student's face. Another threatened to unleash the
full power of the dreaded US immigration office
and the Patriot Act-empowered police. During the
talk, Madhav's brigade sat opposite him,
including a man who had assaulted a student in
the past for simply asking a tough question of
the RSS ideologue. The intimidation tactics came
to the notice of university officials later.
Madhav's presence on two prestigious university
campuses has left a thick trail of controversy
and rage, a war of petitions and many questions
about what exactly he is up to in this month-long
'America darshan'. Should he have been allowed to
speak at JHU and the University of Pennsylvania
(U Penn) and wash off the blood of the Gujarat
riots with a mere "it was an unfortunate event
and we passed a resolution about it"? Should an
audience of graduate students have been subjected
to the mishmash Madhav grandly called historical
facts without the benefit of context and
counterpoints?
No, said more than 150 academics teaching South Asian studies around the US.
They signed a petition questioning the decision
to invite Madhav in the first place. The petition
zoomed through email boxes, getting weightier
before Madhav travelled from one campus to
another. The critics stressed that giving him a
platform was akin to providing the Ku Klux Klan a
free ride to spread hate. Surely, the history
departments would not invite a KKK spokesman to
learn about lynching. Madhav's 'talks' at
universities would legitimise the RSS, gild his
resume and give him a US stamp of approval, the
critics said. Itty Abraham, a professor at George
Washington University, asked what the "net
advantage was of having someone like him speak?
You humanise him and he puts layer upon layer of
evilness on Muslims. We are lucky that he was
unsophisticated. But what if a slick guy came?"
Sunil Khilnani, director of the South Asia
program at JHU, stressed that he invited the RSS
spokesperson because it was important to expose
his students to the various "currents in Indian
politics". Distancing himself from the speaker he
had invited, Khilnani read a statement before the
talk, clarifying that he and the department in
"no way endorse the views" of the RSS. The RSS
and its ideology are "dangerous and potentially
destructive of the constitutional identity of the
Indian republic." Since it is a "secretive
organisation, it was all the more important that
we hold it and its office-bearers up to the light
of public debate." For this statement, Khilnani
was assaulted with hate mail. "Hi Suniluddin," an
obscene rant began, jumping quickly into the
gutter of bile unfit for print.
Khilnani, who got brickbats from both sides, says
he finds it problematic that there is "an
unwillingness on either side to engage in an
argument".His view is the academics who
criticised him speak from a safe perch.
"It is all very well to sit in academic campuses,
publish in arcane journals, and keep one's hands
clean. But it is not a political way of looking
at the world. People have to engage in the battle
of ideas and win," says Khilnani, whose book, The
Idea of India, presents a nuanced appraisal of
rightwing Hindu politics in India, among other
things.
Francine Frankel, director of the Center for the
Advanced Study of India, said she invited Madhav
to U Penn to get some answers. "The RSS, which as
a social organisation not subject to political
accountability is, in reality, the ideological
guide of the BJP, and its strongest source of
grassroots political workers-an arrangement not
present in any other democracy," she said.
Questions about where Hindutva stands after
Gujarat and the 2004 elections are pertinent and
best addressed to the RSS spokesman, she added.
Determined to control the event, she allowed only
about 35 academics and graduate students to
attend. No protesters, few tough questions-not
the kind of temper one tends to associate with US
campuses. And Madhav walked away sanguine. He
simply didn't address the big questions on the
grand alignment and ferment
in the rightwing forces that Frankel posed.
Instead, he gave his stock recitation against
minorities.
By his own admission, Madhav was on a mission to
clear the "concerns about Gujarat" in the Indian
American community. Perhaps, funds from rich NRIs
were drying up because Gujarat was just too
difficult to rationalise. But he rallied the
faithful while dipping deliriously into a society
where anti-Muslim sentiment bubbles just below
the surface. Three more university talks are
scheduled. In the end he will have raked up a
measure of credibility, and some legitimacy
despite Gujarat and despite a hundred mutinies
under way against the Christians.
S. Akbar Zaidi, a visiting professor from
Pakistan who was at the JHU event, was surprised
at the similarities between Madhav and the
rabble-rousers back home. "One hears exactly the
same type of vile stuff against Hindus and
Indians from many Pakistani groups. I thought he
would give a far more nuanced and intelligent
presentation."
David Ludden, a South Asia expert who heard
Madhav at U Penn, wrote: "The RSS is moving to
spin into the media mainstream and they might get
people in the US to believe, little by little,
that Hindutva is democratic and secular. (That)
Muslims are intolerant." Even among American
liberals, this message may go down smoothly, he
warned. But he found the whole talk redundant
because everything Madhav said is in the books.
"So why listen to him? The RSS actions are
sickening, its ideas are inane, its history is
insane."
Madhav certainly seems to have got more from the
universities than they got from him.
______
[7]
Deccan Herald- October 10, 2004
http://www.deccanherald.com/deccanherald/oct102004/sl8.asp
Shankar Guha Niyogi & Chattisgarh
He taught the Adivasi labourers the power of
unity in combating their exploitation by mine
owners, the forest mafia and the stone quarry
contractors.
Disillusioned by mainstream politics, some people
have often looked for alternatives in grass-roots
movements striving for justice.
Shankar Guha Niyogi, a trade union leader and
Secretary of the Chattisgarh Shramik Sangh (CMSS)
was one of the robust figures in the country who
transformed the scattered resistance of the
Adivasis into an organised response against the
exploitative and 'whims and whips' of
mine-owners, stone contractors and the forest
mafia.
Done to death on the morning of September 28,
1991, in Bhillai by hired assassins, Niyogi has
left a legacy of united Adivasi trade unionism
and awareness that has not died down with the
passing away of the leader.
From the Sixties when he came to Durg town in
Chattisgarh to stay with his uncle to complete
his education to his last day, he not only
successfully organised workers engaged in more
than a hundred metal industries around Bhillai
Steel Plant (BSP) but also unshackled Adivasis in
durg, Bilaspur, Bhillai, Rajnandgaon and Bastar
districts. While under the banner of Chattisgarh
Mukti Morch (CMM) Niyogi fought for the political
rights of the tribals, he created the CMSS to
bring together under one roof about 30,000
workers in BSP and other industrial units and
mills in the region.
Through the Pragatisheel Engineering Sharmik
Sangh (PESS), he outflanked industrial brokers
who organised contract labour in over hundred
industries in Bhillai with low and unregulated
wages.
The contract daily wagers in the metal industries
were organised for big business houses (including
Simplex and Kedia) on the one hand and the small
work shops on the other where working hours would
be as long as 15 hours a day.
After a prolonged clashes with the Industrial
house owners involving police firing and death of
workers, he was able to untie the stranglehold of
owners on the workers and force them to concede
many demands including departmentalisation
(making workers permanent), minimum basic wages
and restricting of working hours to 8 hours.
All through his 30 years' work in Chattisgarh,
Niyogi identified himself with the Adivasis and
brought about a change in their lives. He went
beyond the trade union movements and sought a
'new life' for tribals. Unfortunately even 13
years after his untimely violent death, the
culprits are still scot free with Supreme Court
only recently beginning to hear a petition filed
by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)
against a verdict of Jabalpur High Court on June
16, 1998, that set free six of the accused.
Niyogi's daughter Kranti and son Jeet Guha Niyogi
who are in the Capital to pursue the court case
told Deccan Herald that there had been an
inordinate delay in the disposal of the case.
The least they expect that the case is expedited.
Niyogi was born in North Bengal but made 'tribal
areas' in Chattisgarh his 'Karmbhoomi' (country
of his struggle), married a tribal girl, lived,
fought and breathed his last there for a cause so
dear to him. Speedy justice in the case would be
a step forward in consolidation of his work.
DEEPAK UPRETI
in New Delhi
______
[8] Upcoming Events @ the European Social Forum:
ESF Workshop - Awaz and Radical Activist Network
"COMMUNALISM IN SOUTH ASIA AND ITS IMPACT IN EUROPE"
Saturday [16 October, 2004] 4.30-6.30pm
Bloomsbury
Birkbeck 541
Speakers: Karamat Ali (Pakistani trades
unionist); Chetan Bhatt (Awaz); Shabunum Tejani
(Awaz); Mike Marqusee (writer, RAN)
(ii)
"WOMEN IN SOUTH ASIA, MIDDLE EAST, EUROPE: RESISTING
PATRIARCHY, STATE AND RELIGION BASED VIOLENCE"
SEMINAR AT THE EUROPEAN SOCIAL FORUM 2004 IN LONDON
NATFHE, 17-27 Britannia Street, off Gray's Inn Road, London
WC1, (near King's Cross Station)
Friday, 15 October 2004, 19.00 - 21.00
In India the state continues to rape and kill women from
Kashmir to Manipur in the name of 'national security'. In
Gujarat state the same government which sponsored genocidal
attacks on Muslim communities targeting women remains in
power.
In Britain South Asian women who leave violent relationships
face deportation under sexist and racist immigration laws if
they are foreign nationals -reinforcing patriarchal
oppression within the family. Women like Kiran Azam from
Pakistan are facing a virtual death sentence: if she is
deported her life will be in danger in a society where
violence against women - including so-called 'honour
killings' have increased sharply with the rise of right-wing
religious forces.
In Turkey rape and sexual torture are systematically used by
the state-forces to silence Kurdish women's demands for human
rights and democracy. In Diyarbakir, a 15-year-old girl was
killed by her brother to "preserve the family's honour" after
she had been raped and left pregnant by her cousin. She is
not the only one; since the "moderate Islam" AKP government
came to power religion-based violence is spreading even more.
In the Netherlands the Kurdish women's rights activist Nuriye
Kesbir has been imprisoned pending deportation after her
request for political asylum was rejected without any actual
legal basis. If she is deported she will face the same
inhuman treatment as 10,000 other Kurdish women did before in
Turkish prisons. Further, the German government
plans "concentrated deportations" of Kurdish refugees, who
had received exceptional leave to remain because of their
traumatic experiences - this mainly applies to women.
As women from South Asia, from the Middle East and Europe we
need to name the different forms of oppression we are facing,
and to exchange our experiences and strategies for survival
and resistance.
We feel it is particularly important to define and organise
the struggle for our rights as women from our own
perspectives, at a time when the pretext of
defending "women's rights" is used more and more by those in
power in order to justify wars, military attacks and
sanctions.
Globally, sexist, racist and religious "arguments" are used
to maintain and justify the patriarchal order in family,
society and state. Violence, rape, exploitation of
labour, "honour killings", trafficking in womenŠ The crusades
of the Vatican and US-government against women's reproductive
rights; racist immigration laws and practices; denial of the
right of self-determinationŠ
We see similar patterns of oppression that are not restricted
to any geographical region, but that also have specific aims
and consequences.
Against this background we invite you to a joint discussion.
Representatives from the organising groups will introduce
their approaches, experiences and perspectives that have been
gained in different fields of their engagement. By organising
this seminar in the framework of the ESF-programme we want to
share views, experiences and concepts of women's resistance.
Among other we want to discuss the following questions:
- Which forms of violence are women confronted with?
What are the connections between religion-based violence,
state and patriarchal oppression? How can we oppose racist
politics and ideologies?
- What impacts have the present attacks on women and
women's rights?
- What are women's strategies for survival and
resistance in South Asia, the Middle East and Europe? What
are the gains of the present initiatives and movements? What
are their deficiencies?
- How can we strengthen local and international co-
operation?
Organised by:
International Free Women's Foundation / Netherlands;
info at freewomensfoundation.org CENI-Kurdish Women's Peace
Office / Germany; info at ceni-kurdistan.de South Asia
Solidarity Group (SASG) / U.K., sasg at southasiasolidarity.org
Asian Women Unite! / U.K. asianwomenunite at hotmail.com
Speakers: Representatives of the organising groups
Languages: English, French, Urdu, Turkish and Kurdish
More information: South Asia Solidarity Group, Tel: 020
7267 0923 sasg at southasiasolidarity.orgInternational Free
Women's Foundation (IFWF) Tel: 0031 (0) 10 465 18 00
info at freewomensfoundation.org
(iii)
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Buzz on the perils of fundamentalist politics, on
matters of peace and democratisation in South
Asia. SACW is an independent & non-profit
citizens wire service run since 1998 by South
Asia Citizens Web: www.sacw.net/
SACW archive is available at: bridget.jatol.com/pipermail/sacw_insaf.net/
Sister initiatives :
South Asia Counter Information Project : snipurl.com/sacip
South Asians Against Nukes: www.s-asians-against-nukes.org
Communalism Watch: communalism.blogspot.com/
DISCLAIMER: Opinions expressed in materials carried in the posts do not
necessarily reflect the views of SACW compilers.
More information about the Sacw
mailing list