by admin | May 25, 2021 | News, Politics
Hardik Patel
Bhopal : Gujarat’s Patidar leader Hardik Patel on Monday said that he didn’t want a certificate on patriotism from those who were pursuing divisive politics in the country.
“All types of things have been said about my Bhopal visit — that it will promote casteism. If talking of the interests of farmers, youths and jobs is casteism, then I will do it. But those who want to do politics of Hindus and Muslims, and want to break this country do not call it casteism, but patriotism. I don’t want a certificate from such people,” Patel told the media here.
Asked if he would campaign in the coming Assembly elections in Madhya Pradesh later this year, the Patidar leader said: “There is no harm in doing good work. I will continue to do good work.”
The Patidar Anamat Andolan Samiti leader was on a one-day visit to the state capital.
—IANS
by admin | May 25, 2021 | News, Politics
By Saurabh Katkurwar,
Ayodhya : This is a town held sacred for its association with Hindu religious lore, which in latter days acquired the unflattering reputation of being a hotbed of Hindu-Muslim antagonism and religio-political conflict whose reverberations are felt both nationally and internationally. But what is little known, and may be even difficult to believe, is that Ayodhya has traditionally been known for its inter-faith harmony where it is not out of the ordinary for a Muslim tailor to stitch clothes for the idol of Ram or for a Hindu priest to help renovate an old mosque.
As India approaches 25 years of the apocalyptic demolition of the 16th century Babri Masjid on December 6, citizens of Ayodhya take pains to talk about their age-old heritage of cultural collaboration and free participation in inter-religious activities which has kept the secular fabric of the twin intact — despite the dragging temple-mosque politico-legal dispute over 2.7 acres of prime land whose ownership is contested by both Hindus and Muslims.
Locals, both Hindus and Muslims, say they were “outsiders” who came to Ayodhya in 1992 and stirred trouble while locals were busy saving each other — irrespective of their religious faiths — from the brunt of the riots that ensued. Out of the town’s total population of around 60,000, Muslims account for only six per cent. But they never felt any discrimination from Hindus, says Mohammed Chand Qaziana, priest at the Dargah of Sayyed Mohammad Ibrahim.
Qaziana said that the dargah was protected by local Hindus when the kar sevaks, or Hindu religious activists who came from outside the town, demolished the Babri mosque on December 6, 1992, on the ground that it was erected there by invading Mughal emperor Babar after razing a temple dedicated to Ram, the revered warrior-god of Hindus.
“This 900-year-old dargah has followers from the Hindu community as well, many of whom regularly pay a visit here. It is a symbol of our centuries-old harmonious existence. When it was attacked, our Hindu brothers formed a human shield around it and saved it,” Qaziana recalled to IANS.
Faizabad district, in which Ayodhya falls, has about 30 per cent Muslim population. Qaziana said there is an unannounced understanding among the people here not to fall prey to hate speeches of politicians and outsiders.
What makes communal harmony special here is the participation in inter-faith events and rituals — Muslims stitching clothes for Hindu deities, participating in Ramleela (religious theatre based on the life of Ram) or doing namaz (prayers) in Hindu religious places; and Hindus similarly contributing to mosque renovation or helping Muslim fellow townspeople in times of need.
Echoing Qaziana’s views, Barfi Maharaj, who identifies himself as a Hindu social worker, said the Masjid was razed on December 6 by Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) hotheads and locals had no role in it.
“We were neither influenced by hate speeches nor did we participate in the demolition drive. It was VHP that brought outsiders to demolish the Masjid. How can people from the birthplace of Ram, who is known for his secular teachings, commit such a sinful act?” asked Barfi Maharaj.
Giving examples of inter-faith harmony in the town, he said that a mosque near Hanumangadhi in Ayodhya was being renovated by a Hindu mahant (priest) while a Muslim tailor had been stitching clothes for the idol of Ram that is installed in the makeshift temple at the disputed site of Babri Masjid.
Sadik Ali, alias Babu Khan, said he had stitched seven to eight sets of clothes for the Hindu gods so far. Sadik, who is said to be a stakeholder in the negotiations in the issue, called Babri Masjid demolition “unfortunate” but said he had no problem in the construction of Ram Mandir on the disputed land.
“We do have faith in Ram. We had offered namaz at Hanuman Gadhi. If Hindus want big temples for their beloved god, we do not have a problem. We just want a piece of land nearby for a mosque,” Ali said.
Mohammed Salim has been making ‘khadav’ (wooden sandal), which were traditionally used by sadhus and priests but are now largely used in temples.
Salim said his family had been selling khadavs since generations which are usually bought by temple priests. “I have never witnessed any tension between the two communities here. We depend on each other for our needs and we respect each other,” he said.
The mutual understanding and respect for Hindus and Muslims here — revealing to an outsider — figure prominently in the region as one talks to the locals who, irrespective of their religion, slammed political leaders for vitiating the issue in an attempt to get electoral mileage.
A local contractor, Shailendra Pandey, said the people of Ayodhya were hardly consulted on what has come to be known as the Mandir-Masjid issue and politicians used Ram and the temple issue for their personal gains.
“You go anywhere in the city and talk to anyone. You will not find an iota of communal hatred among them. The unholy politics by outsiders has given our city a negative image,” Pandey said.
Mohammed Naeem, who is the president of Naugaja Dargah, said politicians were now creating hurdles in the way of the temple construction.
“This town is a perfect example of religious harmony and secularism, thanks to its rich culture and history. Everyone would be happy if the contentious issue is resolved amicably. However, we feel the politicians have kept this issue pending for their selfish motives,” Naeem said.
Whatever be the difficulties and complexities in the Mandir-Masjid issue, there will not be any negative impact in the socio-religious fabric of the city, feel the people of Ayodhya, once the kingdom of Ram, known for being a model of good governance in that era.
(This feature is part of a special series that seeks to bring unique and extraordinary stories of ordinary people, groups and communities from across a diverse, plural and inclusive India, and has been made possible by a collaboration between IANS and the Frank Islam Foundation. Saurabh Katkurwar can be contacted at saurabh.k@ians.in)
—IANS
by admin | May 25, 2021 | News, Politics
Arvind Kejriwal
New Delhi : Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal on Sunday accused the BJP of dividing India on Hindu-Muslim lines and said it had done in three years what Pakistan and its ISI could not do in 60 years.
“Pakistan’s biggest dream is to divide Hindustan on the lines of Hindus and Muslims. Those who’re dividing the country on the lines of Hindus and Muslims are ISI agents,” the Aam Aadmi Party leader said at the party’s National Conference here.
“Under the veil of patriots, they’re anti-nationals. They want to weaken the country. This dream has been harboured by Pakistan. What Inter-Services Intelligence could not do in 60 years, the BJP has done in three years,” he said and asked voters in Gujarat to defeat the BJP.
Thousands of party workers participated in the conference at the Ramlila Maidan here, from where the India Against Corruption movement led by Anna Hazare started and later gave birth to the AAP party in 2012. The event drew participation from 22 states.
Talking about the December Gujarat elections, Kejriwal said: “I request the people of Gujarat to give your vote to the candidate or party who can defeat the BJP.”
“If somewhere, the AAP is winning, give your vote to AAP. If any other party is winning, give the vote to them. But defeat the BJP,” Kejriwal said.
Speaking on the occasion, AAP founder-member Kumar Vishwas said the party had moved away from the path it set out on and has to find the right way forward.
“Don’t you think we have gone somewhere else from where we were moving to five years ago? We have to find the right way,” the AAP leader said.
He also called for introspection on the part of the AAP leadership and cadres. “We should think about ourselves as to where we started five years ago and where we are now.”A
Vishwas said some party leaders do not talk about social activist Anna Hazare, under whose leadership many of them participated in the 2011 anti-corruption movement. “Anna was the creator of this campaign.”
Referring to the AAP National Council meeting held this month, he said his name was not in the list of speakers at the event. However, he said, he will not go anywhere and stay in the party.
In October, AAP revoked the suspension of AAP MLA Amanatullah Khan, who had accused Vishwas of being a traitor. In May, Khan was suspended, days after making the accusation and Vishwas was named AAP incharge of Rajasthan.
While thousands of party volunteers in the crowd sported the trademark AAP white cap with the party symbol “broom”, many like Munesh Rani, 53, had the broom symbol and “AAP” painted on their cheeks.
AAP party flags with Kejriwal’s face and party symbol dotted the ground as volunteers waved them as AAP leaders spoke from the stage.
Party leaders, including Delhi Ministers Manish Sisodia and Gopal Rai, AAP Spokesperson Ashutosh, National Secretary Pankaj Gupta, as well as Punjab MP Bhagwant Mann spoke on the occasion, as were a large number of AAP MLAs from Delhi and Punjab as well as AAP corporators from the national capital.
—IANS
by admin | May 25, 2021 | News, Politics
Patna : RJD chief Lalu Prasad has termed Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar a “fake socialist” who has joined hands with communal forces and is afraid of them.
His comment comes ahead of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit here on Saturday to attend the centenary celebrations of Patna University.
“He is a fake socialist. Real socialist neither joins hands with communal forces nor is afraid of them,” Lalu Prasad tweeted.
He added “Ye asal mein Godse aur Hitler ka bada wala pujari hai (He is actually a big follower of Godse and Hitler).”
In the last week of July, Nitish Kumar had dumped the RJD and Congress to join hands with BJP and form the government. In August his party JD-U formally joined the BJP-led NDA.
Lalu Prasad has earlier called Nitish Kumar the Paltu Ram of politics for breaking the Grand Alliance and forming a new government with the BJP.
Nitish Kumar had in 2013 dumped the BJP and joined hands with the RJD and Congress.
—IANS
by admin | May 25, 2021 | Opinions
Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) chief Mohan Bhagwat
By Amulya Ganguli,
Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) chief Mohan Bhagwat’s advice to cow vigilantes not to bother over much about judicial strictures shows a measure of annoyance with the roadblocks which the Hindutva lobby is facing in a secular polity.
The dissatisfaction may have increased in the saffron camp in view of two more Supreme Court pronouncements relating to inter-faith marriages and the fate of the Rohingyas, the hapless refugees from Myanmar who have aroused the saffron brotherhood’s ire presumably because they are Muslims.
On inter-faith marriages, the court has wanted to know in the context of a Kerala High Court judgement whether the judiciary can annul a wedding between two adults belonging to two different religions.
It is a rhetorical question which strikes at the root of a Sangh Parivar agenda which seeks to prohibit by fair means and foul any love affair or marriage between a Hindu woman and Muslim man and, by implication, between Hindus and Christians as well or any other religious community.
The Parivar’s argument is that such nuptials are no more than a ploy to lure the woman into a familial arrangement to facilitate her conversion.
Hence, the phrase “love jehad”, depicting a hapless Hindu woman who is the victim of a predatory Muslim male.
The apex court’s intervention is in a case in Kerala where the High Court has nullified the marriage of a 24-year-old woman with a Muslim while the Supreme Court had earlier ordered a National Investigation Agency (NIA) probe in the matter although the NIA is supposed to look into only acts of terror.
Irrespective of the final outcome of the Supreme Court’s examination of the case, the arguments that have already been aired such as whether the two prominent Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) politicians who have Hindu wives can be accused of “love jehad” are bound to be awkward for the Parivar.
But what must be no less disconcerting for the latter is that the undermining of some of the programmes, which the saffron camp has pursued diligently, can raise questions about other divisive initiatives like ghar wapsi or converting Muslims to Hinduism.
This is all the more so because the saffron objections to inter-faith marriages are not unlike the often violent disapproval of the antediluvian khap panchayats to connubial ties between grown-ups belonging to different castes and communities or for being members of the same gotra.
As is known, one of the main proponents of the “love jehad” campaign was Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath before he took office.
Of late, his ardour to keep marriages within the confines of each community has been dampened by the Centre’s unease about a rise in communal temperature lest it should affect Narendra Modi’s development agenda.
Besides, the Chief Minister has come under growing criticism because of his focus on erasing Muslim names such as that of Mughalsarai railway junction and omitting to mention the Taj Mahal in a tourist brochure rather than on saving babies in hospitals or ensuring that the police show a modicum of respect for girl students in Banaras Hindu University.
Clearly, at a time when Yogi Adityanath is proving to be as ineffective a Chief Minister as Suresh Prabhu was a Railway Minister, judicial reprimands are the last thing which the BJP wants, whether in internal affairs or in matters which have an external dimension.
If the judicial diktats on checking the gau rakshaks (cow vigilantes) and on “love jehad” have a domestic angle, the pronouncements on the Rohingyas impinge on issues of national security and international law and obligations.
Among the latter is the principle of “non-refoulement” which rules against sending back refugees to places where they are not wanted.
There is little doubt that if the government resorts to a forcible eviction of the Rohingyas, it will face considerable international opprobrium.
Considering, however, that the RSS chief has lambasted the refugees as vehemently as the government and BJP spokesmen have done, it is clear that the Parivar’s political and “cultural” wings are on the same page.
The Supreme Court’s verdict on the petition filed before it by two Rohingya refugees will be known after some time. But what the Hindutva group is likely to find disturbing is how the checks and balances built into the constitutional system can stall its efforts to take the country in a certain direction.
The only saving grace is the independence of the judiciary, especially at the higher levels, although this institution, too, experienced a troubling period during the emergency of June 1975 to March 1977, when even the principle of habeas corpus, the cornerstone of individual freedom, was suspended.
Interestingly, Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, while upholding the right to privacy in August overturned the verdict on the habeas corpus case which was delivered four decades ago by, among others, his father, Justice Y.V. Chandrachud.
In the case on gau rakshaks, love jehad and Rohingyas, the differences between the judiciary and the saffron Parivar are obvious.
For the average person, however, the judiciary continues to stand as a guardian against authoritarian and intolerant tendencies in the absence of an effective opposition.
(Amulya Ganguli is a political analyst. The views expressed are personal. He can be reached at amulyaganguli@gmail.com)
—IANS
