Forum Menu - Click/Swipe to open
 

India Diary

Jump to page:

You have contributed 0.0% of this topic

Thread Tools
Appreciate
Topic Appreciation
dr76, Jinn, Maria al-Qibtiyya, Taalibah, sipraomer, Naqshband66, bint e aisha, mSiddiqui, abuzayd2k, tanveerzakee, alandalus, moulanakhalil, ssaad, sharjan8643, Honest servant
Rank Image
Maripat's avatar
Offline
Gham-o-Huzn
3,148
Brother
3,696
Maripat's avatar
#856 [Permalink] Posted on 1st October 2021 08:18
S Abdullah Tariq on Maulana Kaleem Siddiqui


S Abdullah Tariq of Rampur is a Dayi par excellence. In a recent video he is seen asserting that it is false accusation that Maulana Kaleem Siddiqui has converted five hundred thousand Indian Hindus to Islam.

This is another irritating Muslim reaction to me. Either you be proud of your Dawah or be apologetic about it. The in between way is pure Munafiqat.

If you invite non-Muslims to Islam you are behaving as their well wisher. They, on the other hand, will react in a variety of ways. There may be rejection. There may be acceptance. There may be disagreement. There may be agreement on the proposal but refusal to accept it. One stark possibility is of pure anger and hatred.

Dr Zakir Naik, by the Grace of Allah SWT, has defeated all the existing argumentative people from the majority community of India but there will be a large number of Hindus who will hate Muslims for this.

To say among Muslims that you are a Dayi and to say on the You Tube that you are not does not give a clear message to Muslims.

Be a Dayi and face the music.

On the technical ground it can be accepted that Maulana Kaleem Siddiqui has not converted a single Hindu. He does not do the Dawah talk himself. He only motivates, encourages and urges ground action. But let us not forget that the news of five hundred thousand conversions is not spread by the enemies. This info follows Maulana where ever he goes.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Maripat's avatar
Offline
Gham-o-Huzn
3,148
Brother
3,696
Maripat's avatar
#857 [Permalink] Posted on 1st October 2021 08:21
Maulana and Lib-Dems


Lib-Dems usually make noise about freedom to propagate one's religion but in their hearts they will not support Maulana. Like the Saffronite they will be worried about conversions changing Indian demography.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Maripat's avatar
Offline
Gham-o-Huzn
3,148
Brother
3,696
Maripat's avatar
#858 [Permalink] Posted on 1st October 2021 08:36
Dr Zakir Naik vs Maulana Kaleem Siddiqui


Dr Zakir Naik is a Dayi par excellence and so is Maulana.

Dr Naik took the debate route and told in flat terms either you follow Islam in this life or face God's wrath in afterlife.

Maulana on the other hand took the love route and told Hindus that we offer you Islam because we are your well wishers and we love you.

After seeing the video in which one ATS officer is holding Maulana's hand symbolizing arrest Muslims will feel agitated.

Is it an attack on Islam? This question is easy to answer. RSS existence is to hate Islam and that is what they have been doing since 1925. Lib-Dems will argue that the Saffronite is simply trying to defend its people against conversion onslaught.

Who is right? We get a glimpse of the solution in one of the videos of Dr Israr Ahmed. He said that if a Muslim ruler has enough power than he can ask a non-Muslim ruler in neighbourhood to allow Dawah work and challenge in case of denial.

This example does not help us because Muslims are not in power in India.

There are other arguments that have been crowding my mind.

Islam is nearly as old in India as it is in the world. Hindus know about Islam for a long time. For example every single Hindu movement I know of has its own summary of teachings of Islam. They have got a thing wrong here and another wrong there but over all summary is known to all of them. It devolves on them to accept the truth. If they are not accepting it then it is out of their own volition. This leads us to believe that our Dawah responsibility is done.

With Dr Zakir Naik getting locked out of India we can claim that this is end of the arguments with the Hindus.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Offline
Unspecified
394
Brother
93
#859 [Permalink] Posted on 2nd October 2021 03:27
Maripat wrote:
View original post

Professor Sahab, is this the same Kaleemul Hafeez of Al Hilal, Sahaswan (UP)?
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Offline
Unspecified
394
Brother
93
#860 [Permalink] Posted on 2nd October 2021 04:04
Maripat wrote:
View original post

Jazakallah for this share, Professor Sahab.

My personal take is Maulana was not able to put his points forward coherently. His Urdu bayans at ijtemas and majalis are much more coherent and focused. It seems Maulana was (as usual) unprepared for the line of questioning he was subjected to in this interview. I've felt that Maulana has always come across as a little deficient when addressing questions by non Muslims. On the point of speaking coherently and unequivocally with non Muslims, Maulana Arshad HA is much more adept.

On the question of whether Deoband and the Taliban are the same, Maulana tries to shift the argument and says India and Afghanistan share a long common history and should try to maintain a cordial relationship. Also, Maulana asserts that Indian Muslims are an asset to India and should not be portrayed as traitors. He also reminds us of the role of Shaykhul Hind RA in the freedom movement. Shaykhul Hind RA formed an inclusive shadow government in Afghanistan during the British Raj, with Raja Mahendra Pratap of Mathura as President. He also pointed out that some of the leading scholars of Deoband opposed the partition of India and deemed it anti-Islamic.

On the question of MIM causing polarization, Maulana says that while that is likely, MIM performs an important duty by highlighting issues of downtrodden Muslims and tries to give them political representation.

On the question of the working of the BJP government, Maulana says that while they may have done some good work in terms of amenities for the poor irrespective of religion and caste, they failed in their primary responsibility of bringing various communities together and working towards unity. He highlighted the rising cases of mob lynchings and other injustices to Muslims and holds these to be failures of the BJP government at the center and at the state levels.

Overall, Maulana's content was relevant, but his presentation was unpolished.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Maripat's avatar
Offline
Gham-o-Huzn
3,148
Brother
3,696
Maripat's avatar
#861 [Permalink] Posted on 2nd October 2021 05:37
sharjan8643 wrote:
View original post


Quote:
Professor Sahab, is this the same Kaleemul Hafeez of Al Hilal, Sahaswan (UP)?

It is difficult for me to decide ya akhi.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Maripat's avatar
Offline
Gham-o-Huzn
3,148
Brother
3,696
Maripat's avatar
#862 [Permalink] Posted on 2nd October 2021 08:11
October 2, Gandhi Jayanti, Gandhi Birth Day in India


In his famous book of 1989 Partition of India : Legend vs Reality HM Seervai averred that publication of papers related to the progress of things towards partition and independence of India should lead to reassessment of many reputations.

One of the reputation that must be reassessed is of MK Gandhi.

Gandhi is taken, apart from being an apostle of peace and the man who successfully lead India to independence, as a well wisher of Muslims and a portent of Hindu-Muslim unity.

This is the reputation that might go under revision in spite of the fact that he lost his life in the very same process.

When Gandhi arrived back in India from South Africa we are in the year 1919 - the year when Jalianwala Bagh massacre took place in Amritsar.

Among the first things that Gandhi did was to push Muhammed Ali Jinnah out both from the Indian National Congress and the Home Rule League.

In Congress and Home Rule League both Hindus and Muslims were participating in the process that is historically known as the freedom struggle.

From this it is clear that there was absolutely no possibility of the Muslim rule returning to India after the British departure. The Muslim League was already operational since 1906 but it was a sort of elite Muslim club that might have ended up protecting the interest of the few Nawabs in it. It presented no danger of a Muslim take over of independent India.

Gandhi, on the other hand, paid more attention to Muslim contribution to the struggle rather than the struggle as a whole and after nudging out Jinnah, who quit the struggle and went to UK after this debilitating setback, he took control of the Khilafat Movement of Muslims and killed it at the earliest opportunity provided by the Chauri-Chaura episode.

Gandhi did his job with finesse and efficiency. And then he had Lucknow pact with BR Ambedkar where thwarted exodus of Dalits, whom he called Harijan - children of God, to Islam by providing them double reservation both in jobs and legislature.

In his process of forging Hindu-Muslim unity Gandhi performed exemplary things like several Satyagrahs but he did not miss on neutralizing Muslim efforts to a large extent.

His colleague, compatriot and protegee, Jawahar Lal Nehru, did provide some sort of level playing field to Muslims in independent India but Muslims were too burdened, psychologically, to take advantage of it. This reflected in 2006 Sachar Commitee Report where Muslims were found to have only two to three percent share in jobs against their 14.2 percent population share in India and they became economically worse off than Dalits.

In this context we can not ignore what RSS has been trying in parallel with the independence struggle and in the independent India. Their focus has been on killing of Muslims and that they have been doing all the time - before and after independence. At the present moment lynchings of Muslims have become so regular that these do not outrage people anymore.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Maripat's avatar
Offline
Gham-o-Huzn
3,148
Brother
3,696
Maripat's avatar
#863 [Permalink] Posted on 2nd October 2021 08:34
A Facebook Conversation on Bapu - MK Gandhi


Misra : Bapu or no Bapu, British would have left India.

Shukla: सवाल सिर्फ आज़ादी का नहीं था,बहुत जटिल और खतरनाक चीजें हो रही थी,सबसे ज्यादा चिंता गांधी या ब्रिटिश को थी वो भारत के अंदर जाति धर्म भाषा के झगड़े,अशिक्षा,सिर्फ स्वतंत्र करने की बात नहीं थी,एक हजार राजे राजवाड़े थे जिनका एग्रीमेंट ब्रिटिश राजा से था.

1920 में जब होमरूल एक्ट आया तब साफ हो गया था कि अंग्रेज चले जाएंगे,वो चाहते थे प्रशासन भारतीय संभालें,दस साल के एक्सपेरिमेंट की तरह हर राज्य में भारतीयों की सरकार बनी,नेशनल असेंबली भी,संसद चूंकि ब्रिटेन में थी,साइमन इसी के ऑडिट के लिए भारत आया था,पूना पैक्ट में भी ये था,ब्रिटिश को जाना था लेकिन लफड़ा भारत को हिंसा और गृह युद्ध से बचाना था,अराजकता फैलने से रोकना था,गांधी ये ही कर रहे थे,वो बस ये चाहते थे हिंदू मुस्लिम और सारी जातियां एक साथ शांति से रहें.

Google Translation:
The question was not only of freedom, very complicated and dangerous things were happening, Gandhi or the British were most concerned about caste religion language conflicts, illiteracy, not just freedom within India, there were a thousand kings who had royalties. The agreement was with the British king.

In 1920, when the Home Rule Act came, it was clear that the British would leave, they wanted Indians to take over the administration, like a ten-year experiment, the government of Indians was formed in every state, the National Assembly too, Parliament was in Britain, because of this Simon Came to India for audit, it was there in the Poona Pact too, the British had to go but the fight was to save India from violence and civil war, to stop the spread of anarchy, Gandhi was doing this, he just wanted Hindu-Muslim and other communities to live together in peace.

My Comment : This narrative has to be examined from Muslim perspective.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Maripat's avatar
Offline
Gham-o-Huzn
3,148
Brother
3,696
Maripat's avatar
#864 [Permalink] Posted on 2nd October 2021 13:39
Imran Uddin Ahmad (From Facebook)

महात्मा गांधी जब इंग्लैंड पढ़ने गए तब उन्हे अली इमाम, हसन इमाम, मज़हरुल हक जैसे साथी मिले.
महात्मा गांधी जब साउथ अफ़्रीका गए तो उन्हे हाजी दादा अब्दुल्लाह और हाजी उमर जोहरी जैसे लोगों का साथ मिला.
महात्मा गांधी जब चंपारण गए तो उन्हें पीर मोहम्मद मुनीस और शेख़ गुलाब जैसे लोगों का साथ मिला.
महात्मा गांधी ने जब रॉलेट एक्ट का विरोध किया तो उन्हे सैफ़ुद्दीन किचलु और हकीम अजमल ख़ान जैसे लोगों का साथ मिला, जिनके चाहने वालों ने जलियांवाला बाग़ और पुरानी दिल्ली स्टेशन पर अंग्रेज़ी गोली खाई.
महात्मा गांधी ने जब असहयोग आंदोलन छेड़ा, तब उन्हे पुरी ख़िलाफ़त कमेटी ने सपोर्ट किया. अपने ख़र्चे पर पुरे हिंदुस्तान का दौरा करवाया.
जब महात्मा गाँधी ने दांडी मार्च निकला, तब अब्बास तैयबजी जैसे ज़ईफ़ इंसान ने उनका साथ दिया.
जब बात अहिंसा की आई, तब ख़ान अब्दुल ग़फ़्फ़ार ख़ान जैसा साथी मिला, जिसने लड़ाके कहे जाने वाले पठानो को "क़िस्सा ख्वानी बाज़ार" में हुवे अंग्रेज़ी हिंसा के बाद भी अहिंसा की राह दिखाई.
इन तमात चीज़ों के बाद भी लोगों को गांधीजी के क़ातिल नथ्थूराम गोडसे ही याद हैँ, पर 1917 में गाँधीजी की जान बचाने वाले बख़्त मियां अंसारी को बिलकुल ही नज़रअंदाज़ कर दिया गया है.

Summary : Gandhi had Muslim support at every step.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Maripat's avatar
Offline
Gham-o-Huzn
3,148
Brother
3,696
Maripat's avatar
#865 [Permalink] Posted on 2nd October 2021 14:03
Maripat wrote:
View original post

Quote:
Imran Uddin Ahmad (From Facebook)

महात्मा गांधी जब इंग्लैंड पढ़ने गए तब उन्हे अली इमाम, हसन इमाम, मज़हरुल हक जैसे साथी मिले.
महात्मा गांधी जब साउथ अफ़्रीका गए तो उन्हे हाजी दादा अब्दुल्लाह और हाजी उमर जोहरी जैसे लोगों का साथ मिला.
महात्मा गांधी जब चंपारण गए तो उन्हें पीर मोहम्मद मुनीस और शेख़ गुलाब जैसे लोगों का साथ मिला.
महात्मा गांधी ने जब रॉलेट एक्ट का विरोध किया तो उन्हे सैफ़ुद्दीन किचलु और हकीम अजमल ख़ान जैसे लोगों का साथ मिला, जिनके चाहने वालों ने जलियांवाला बाग़ और पुरानी दिल्ली स्टेशन पर अंग्रेज़ी गोली खाई.
महात्मा गांधी ने जब असहयोग आंदोलन छेड़ा, तब उन्हे पुरी ख़िलाफ़त कमेटी ने सपोर्ट किया. अपने ख़र्चे पर पुरे हिंदुस्तान का दौरा करवाया.
जब महात्मा गाँधी ने दांडी मार्च निकला, तब अब्बास तैयबजी जैसे ज़ईफ़ इंसान ने उनका साथ दिया.
जब बात अहिंसा की आई, तब ख़ान अब्दुल ग़फ़्फ़ार ख़ान जैसा साथी मिला, जिसने लड़ाके कहे जाने वाले पठानो को "क़िस्सा ख्वानी बाज़ार" में हुवे अंग्रेज़ी हिंसा के बाद भी अहिंसा की राह दिखाई.
इन तमात चीज़ों के बाद भी लोगों को गांधीजी के क़ातिल नथ्थूराम गोडसे ही याद हैँ, पर 1917 में गाँधीजी की जान बचाने वाले बख़्त मियां अंसारी को बिलकुल ही नज़रअंदाज़ कर दिया गया है.

Summary : Gandhi had Muslim support at every step.


MK Gandhi had Muslim supporters at every step of his life. He worked closely with Muslims. Yet he managed to stay on top and ahead of them.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Maripat's avatar
Offline
Gham-o-Huzn
3,148
Brother
3,696
Maripat's avatar
#866 [Permalink] Posted on 2nd October 2021 14:09
Maripat wrote:
View original post

Quote:
MK Gandhi had Muslim supporters at every step of his life. He worked closely with Muslims. Yet he managed to stay on top and ahead of them.

From the texture of the freedom struggle it is clear that there was no possibility of Muslim rule returning after departure of the British. Thus MK Gandhi's main contribution was to ensure no share of power for Muslims.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Maripat's avatar
Offline
Gham-o-Huzn
3,148
Brother
3,696
Maripat's avatar
#867 [Permalink] Posted on 2nd October 2021 14:20
Godse competing with Gandhi in Today's Facebook Trend

MK Gandhi was no self-hating Hindu.
And he got India freedom from the British.
The Saffronite who hate him today and who killed him in frail old age could not have got that freedom.
They contributed little in the process.
And yet today, apart from lynching Muslims, they are driving a trend that is competing with the trend on love for Gandhi.
The Saffron brand of Hinduism is about to win over the traditional one.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Maripat's avatar
Offline
Gham-o-Huzn
3,148
Brother
3,696
Maripat's avatar
#868 [Permalink] Posted on 2nd October 2021 14:23
How Should Muslims Feel About Gandhi?


Gandhi ensured that Muslims had no power share in independent India.

Then the Saffronites killed him for being in favour of Muslims.

How should Muslims feel about him?

This question became relevant at large after the publications of partition papers.

But Muslims were not fooled from day one.

The Muslims successfully negotiated for separation of Muslim majority areas from India. Pakistan was created.

Sadly Muslims of India did not struggle and work to clarify their situation in independent India.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Maripat's avatar
Offline
Gham-o-Huzn
3,148
Brother
3,696
Maripat's avatar
#869 [Permalink] Posted on 2nd October 2021 15:05
Gandhi and Nehru


Gandhi ensured that Muslims had no share in power in India.

But Congress did have an unwritten commitment to Muslims - to provide equal opportunity.
This Congress did to some extent in independent India but Muslims perhaps were still apprehensive after partition and did not make full utilization of the opportunity.

And then the Saffron made its slow and sure stride to the helm of the power.

And created a hell for Muslims where Muslims are lynched randomly and the society does not even notice.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Maripat's avatar
Offline
Gham-o-Huzn
3,148
Brother
3,696
Maripat's avatar
#870 [Permalink] Posted on 2nd October 2021 15:33
Seervai on Partition


I have been working for years, from SF days, on the situation of the Muslims the world over, including India.

Edward Said's book Orientalism is a defining and deciding narrative on relationship of the west with the Islamic world.

In case of India HM Seervai's book Partition of India : Legend vs Reality is of critical importance to assess the situation of Muslims in India as well as the Indian subcontinent.

Seervai averred that reputations of the people involved in freedom struggle and partition should be reassessed in view of the publication of the partition papers.

I have been trying to do that. My handicap is that I am not a social historian. My regular occupation does not leave enough energy to analyse these difficult issues.

To be very honest even after putting in my best efforts I realize that the problem is very demanding on my competence.

Sadly very few Muslims from India, or Pakistan and Bangladesh too, have tried to take up this critical issue.

One name is an exception - Professor Ariful Islam, formerly of Statistics department of AMU. I have been talking about him now and then. He has written three books that are relevant in this context.

An alumnus of AMU, engineer Ahmed Saleem Peerzada launched a political party named Parcham Party of India based on his ideas.

Unfortunately the majority community took it to be a communal party and Muslims, therefore, did not patronize it and a few years ago Mr Peerzada left this world without success, a heart broken man.

In south India there has been a party called AIMIM - All India Majlis-e-Ittahad-ul-Muslimeen that focuses on Muslim problems. The majority community has the same view about it as it had for that Parcham Party, that it is communal. But its leaders, the Owaisi brothers, have been going strong and making very important progress regarding situation of Muslims in independent India.

There is Muslim League, still surviving in south Indian state of Kerala.

Then there are some more smaller parties like the SDPI and the Peace Party that are trying to take up the similar problems.

There many people, including Muslims, who say that people like Asadiuddin Owaisi of AIMIM are indirectly helping BJP by cutting into Muslim votes.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top

Jump to page: