New Delhi
There is intense debate these days in certain quarters on the need to redefine Hindu-Muslim relationship.Some of it is okay and could be encouraged but most part is unnecessary. A group of Muslim intellectuals are busy playing 'victim card' and hence would insist thatso-called corrective steps ought to come from the majority that is the Hindus.
They also very fashionably ignore "Hindu grievances" - both of past and present realms - and would demand knee-jerk reactions from the government of the day on certain contentious issuessuch as the Citizen Amendment Act (CAA).
Essentially, thus, we find there is not much change on ground. The Muslim angle to the 'New India'story is --- Muslims have been pushed to second class category. Issues like mob lynching or Hinduanguish against cow slaughters are being given twist and almost a googly spins.
A group of them recently met a key Hindu leader and RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat. Some 'information' onthe interaction has been shared in media articles and interviews. On the other hand came a book titled,'Unmasking Indian Secularism: Why We Need A New Hindu-Muslim Deal'.
Penned by Hasan Surror, this book tries to push a dangerous line that two major communitiesin India (80 percent Hindus and 20 percent Muslims) need to strike a 'deal'. The narrative is built up on a notion that Muslims are 'not safe' and that there is "no equal rights" in the public space.
According to the Rupa Publications, this book presents - "An incisive analysis of why secularism failed and the rise of majoritarian Hindu nationalism, it underlines the urgent need for a new road map to restore communal harmony before it’s too late for course correction".
The agenda is clear - lampoon the Modi government and find fault lines with the likes of RSS and BJP.
The book extract is more vitriolic- "There is no shame in accepting that India has changed and the 1950s Nehruvian model of western-style liberal/secular democracy is no longer in sync with today’s ‘new’ India."
In other words, the author implies Muslims existed happily in 'liberal/secular democracy' of Nehru cultbut there is deliberate escapism from genocide of Hindus in Kashmir and numerous riotsthat took place till the advent of an assertive BJP in 2014.
Of course the argument of the author is while Muslim clerics the Mollahs and their patrons were "appeased",the common Muslims did not gain. The book admits Muslims, too, have not gained from policies of “secular parties” like the Congress that has kept them poor, dependent and fearful.
Another opinion is also equally dangerous. The author says adopting a secular Constitution played a laudatory role in extending a sense of security to a traumatised minority, unsure of its place in a Hindu-majority country.
There is perhaps no admission that partition was a mistake or an act of "gross anti-nationalism".
There is till now hardly any explanation from such intellectuals that dividing a country simply in thepretext of safeguarding one's own community interest is uncalled for.
In contrast, Hindus regard the nation as "mother" and that's something to be loved and worshipped and for the nation every citizen should be ready to make the utmost sacrifice.
Even now in 2022 and so on, there are issues. One, Hindus are called 'Kafirs' by Muslims and this descriptionis not out of love. It symbolises 'us-and-they' syndrome giving a pious-religious spin and also suggeststhat only the Muslim way/road map is acceptable.
Of course in a recent interview former CEC S Y Qureshi and former Delhi Lt. Governor Najeeb Jung have sort of assured that Muslims would not use the word 'kafir' and also that perhaps that Muslims would not have any problem giving up eating beef.
Law, Cow slaughter and Indian states:
# The states of Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Punjab, Rajasthan, Maharashtra, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Haryana, and Delhi prohibit cattle slaughter, including bulls and bullocks of all ages.
** There is no central or Union Government/Parliament that has enacted laws for cattle slaughter. Thus, most states and union territories have developed 'dissimilar legislation', including different legal definitions for calves, bulls, and bullocks.
## West Bengal permits cattle slaughter if the animal is at least 14 years of age and receives a ‘fit-for-slaughter’ certificate from the local state authorities.
** Assam had similar laws earlier. However, the Assam Cattle Preservation Act of 2021 prohibits the slaughter of cows, calves and heifer (a cow that has borne zero or one calf). - The law provides that the state government may exempt certain places of worship or religious occasions for
slaughter of other cattle but not cows, heifer and calves.
** Kerala allows for cattle slaughter for animals that are unfit for work, cannot breed, or are permanently injured.
** No such law in Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Manipur, Mizoram, Nagaland, Tripura, and Lakshadweep.
## Offenders can be arrested without a warrant in Delhi, Goa, Puducherry, Punjab, and Uttar Pradesh. A few stateslaw say even bail can be denied.
Inset::** AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi flayed a group of five Muslim leaders who took up the so-calledissue of establishing dialogue between Hindus and Muslims. He said these leaders were "elite" and were far from ground reality.
** RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat interacted with other Muslim leaders too. On Sept 22, he met chief cleric of the All-India Imam Organization Umer Ahmed Ilyasi at a mosque in Delhi. -- He also paid a visit to the Madarsa Tajweedul Quran in north Delhi.
** Cow slaughter is banned in most parts of India long before the BJP came to power. "..... we said it is banned practically across the country. The Muslims are law-abiding and if anyone violates it, it is a huge mistake and there should be punishment," Quraishi said recently.
No comments:
Post a Comment