Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Theory and Practice of Muslim State in India c10: Muslim State in India Today

Theory and Practice of Muslim State in India c10

Language
English

Contents

Muslim State in India Today

c10.1

Muslim State in India Today

c10.2

The invasions of Muhammad bin Qasim, Mahmud of Ghazni and Amir Timur seem to have happened yesterday. The Qutb Minar in Delhi reminds one of Aibak and Iltutmish. One who visits the Taj Mahal of Agra, remembers Shahjahan. Akbar and Aurangzeb are still the talk of the town. Truly has Bernard Croce said that all history is contemporary. Our living present is the extension of the past which in many ways is still with us. No wonder then that Muslim state in India has not ceased to exist. It is not known as Nizam-i-Mustafa, as, in the Indian secular democracy, it cannot be known by that nomenclature. But it has been internalised in the Muslim psyche and is expressed in a number of euphemistic phrases like Muslim Identity, Muslim Personal Law, (Muslim) Minorities Commission, Muslim Waqf Board, Muslim (Madrasa) Education, and so on. All in all, Muslims by their personal law and separate identity represent a separate system within the secular Indian state, if not a separate state within the Indian state.

6.1. Separate Identity

c10.s1.1

The idea of Muslim exclusiveness and preservation of a separate identity is nothing new. In Islam all human beings are not treated as equals. It makes a distinction between Muslims and non-Muslims. This distinction has been repeated in passages after passages both in the Quran and the Hadis and observed by Muslims the world over. A non-Muslim is a Kafir, an inferior being. Non-Muslims do not enjoy any human rights in this world; they cannot enter Paradise after death. Let us repeat some of the "revelations" about non-Muslims to drive home the point. "The unbelievers among the people of the Book (Jews and Christians) and the pagans shall burn forever in the fire of Hell. They are the vilest of creatures." "When you meet the unbelievers in the battlefield, strike off their heads." "Do not yield to the unbelievers but fight them strenuously." "Muhammad is Allah's apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another.' "Make war on them (the idolaters)." "Allah will chastise them through you and humble them." 'Allah has promised the hypocrites, both men and women, and the unbelievers the fire of Hell. They shall abide in it forever - the curse of Allah is upon them. Theirs shall be a lasting torment." "With chains and shackles round their necks they shall be dragged through boiling water and burnt in the fire of Hell." "Scalding water shall be poured upon their heads, melting their skins... They shall be lashed with the rods of iron." "Whenever in their anguish, they try to escape from Hell, the angels will drag them back, saying: 'Taste the torment of Hell-fire'."¹ On the other hand, Muslims will repose in Paradise as portrayed in the Quran. "They shall recline on coaches lined with thick brocade... They shall dwell with bashful virgins - virgins as fair as corals and rubies." "They shall recline on jewelled coaches face to face, and there shall wait on them immortal youths with bowls and ewers and cups of purest wine." "The righteous (i.e. believers) shall dwell in bliss... their Lord will shield them from the scourge of Hell. He will say: Eat and drink in joy. This is the reward of your labours."²

c10.s1.2

All this and much more has already been cited before. The need to repeat it is to emphasise the Islamic injunction that Muslims and non-Muslims are distinct entities and the two cannot meet on terms of equality. This separate identity was crystallized in the twenty conditions laid down by Caliph Umar for the governance of the Zimmis. The Zimmis (originally Christians and Jews and later Hindus) were those subjects whose life was spared and who were a protected people (although no punishment was awarded to a Muslim who attacked a Zimmi). The conditions are like this. The Muslims are to be respected. The Zimmis are not to dress like Muslims. They must wear a humble dress so that they may be distinguished from Muslims. They are not to give each other Muslim names. They are not to ride on horses with saddle and bridle. They are not to possess swords and arrows. They are not to wear signet rings and seals on their fingers. They are not to rebuild any old buildings which have been destroyed. Muslim travellers are not to be prevented from staying in their temples. They are not to mourn their dead loudly. They are not to buy Muslim slaves. They are not to propagate the customs and usages of polytheists among Muslims. If any of their people show any inclination towards Islam, they are not to be prevented from doing so.³

c10.s1.3

One of the important condition was that the Zimmis were not to build their homes in the neighbourhood of those of Muslims. There are clear injunctions in the Quran for Muslims not to befriend infidels. "Believers, do not choose the infidels... for your friends." The danger in the living together with unbelievers is clearly spelled out in the Quran. "Believers, take neither Jews nor Christians for your friends... whoever of you seeks their friendship shall become one of their number... if you yield to the infidels, they will drag you back to unbelief and you will return headlong to perdition..."⁴ The Prophet ordained: "Momins do not marry infidel women until they accept Islam. A Momin slave girl is better than a *mushrik* woman however pleasing she may look to you. (Similarly) do not give a Muslim woman in marriage to an infidel until he becomes Muslaman. Because however good a *mushrik* may look to you, a Muslim slave is better than an infidel."⁵ This is one very important reason for treating the non-Muslims as aliens, even enemies. Their contact could contaminate. The life promised by Islam in this world and the next is full of material comforts women, wine and rich food. A Muslim whose soul hankers after spiritual elevation may be attracted to move over to 'infidel' cultures and become one with them. Hence there is persistent command to keep away from them. The *tablighis* in India are ever face to face with this problem.

c10.s1.4

The name given to the unbeliever or infidel in Islam is Kafir. It was freely used for non-Muslims by Muslim historians, rulers, elites, soldiers and common men in medieval India. The non-Muslims were treated as inferior beings in the theocratic Muslim state. In today's Indian republic the Hindus are in a vast majority. They cannot be openly addressed with contempt like this. But among Muslims, they are. Mr. Ram Nayak of Bombay has brought out a booklet wherein he asks how come there is no law to prevent 87 per cent Hindus from being abused as Kafirs whereas there is a law known as the civil protection act to prosecute anyone abusing Dalits.⁶ The problem is whether Muslims should have the Kafirs treat them as they treat the Kafirs. Anwar Shaikh's important work, 338-page *Eternity*, rejects the division of humanity into believers and infidels or heathens. He lives abroad under fatwa of death. Dr. Abid Raza Bedar, liberal Indian Muslim also advocates that the word Kafir should exclude the Hindus from its purview. There are not many Muslims who support him because the Quran contains clear cut injunctions regarding Kafirs. It is free from any vagueness about the treatment to be meted out to the non-Muslims; it believes in their complete subservience or total annihilation. Muslim scriptures lay down that the faithful must live separately and exclusively and not form part of the mainstream of the social and political life of a non-Muslim majority country like India. Their exclusiveness is so acute that nationalist Hindus constantly exhort the ,minorities' (read Muslims) to join the national mainstream by laying emphasis on the tolerant principle of *sarvadharma samabhava* while Muslims insist on their separate identity. Islam lacks any doctrine of coexistence, and the Shariat stifles free discussion. Muslim madrasas cannot shed their Kafir complex. That is why the majority of Muslims keep quiet on such issues as raised by Abid Raza Bedar. The present adjustment for coexistence is a temporary expediency in India. In Kashmir, in Assam, and in regions where Muslims are in a majority or are growing in numbers, the plan is to claim a separate state for Muslims. In Muslim countries, even in Pakistan and Bangladesh, the non-Muslims are by and large accorded the status of only Kafirs.⁷ Dr. Zafar-ul-Islam Aslahi of the Department of Islamic Studies, Aligarh Muslim University, says that in the light of the Shariat, imposition of Jiziyah on non-Muslims is justified.⁸

c10.s1.5

To conclude. There is a keen desire on the part of the Muslims, bordering on determination, to maintain their separate identity. They talk of composite Indian culture only to emphasise that it is Muslim culture. Harsh Narain therefore rightly argues that there is no composite culture in India.⁹ The ghetto mentality of poor Muslims living in Mominpuras of all large and small cities, is shared by the highest elites in Muslim society. The situation is best described by Ram Swarup in his inimitable style. "In his book *My Eleven Years with Fakhruddin Ahmad*, Mr. Fazle Ahmed Rehmany quotes an incident which throws interesting light on the psychology of secularism and its need to keep Muslims in isolation and in a sort of protective custody. During the Emergency period some followers of the Jamaat-e-Islami found themselves in the same jail as the members of the RSS; here they began to discover that the latter were no monsters as described by the 'nationalist' and secularist propaganda. Therefore they began to think better of the Hindus. This alarmed the secularists and the interested Maulvis. Some Maulvis belonging to the Jamiat-ul-Ulema-i-Hind met President.. Fakhruddin Ahmad, and reported to him about the growing rapport between the members of the two communities. This 'stunned' the President and he said that this boded an 'ominous' future for Congress Muslim leaders and he promised that he would speak to Indiraji about this dangerous development and ensure that Muslims remain Muslims."

c10.s1.6

For Muslims to remain Muslims it is necessary that they are not governed by any laws except their own Shariat. It is the teaching of Islam to shun contact with non-Muslims except with a view to converting them. This should clear the doubt in the minds of those who wonder how a converted people can claim to form a separate nation. Muslim separatism expresses itself in multitudinous ways. One is Muslim Personal law.

6.2. Muslim Personal Law

c10.s2.1

Muslims constantly harp on their personal law. India is a land of many religions and followers of all these religions have their own religious or personal conventions or rules relating to marriage, divorce, adoption, inheritance, wills etc. Therefore it is realised that there should be some sort of uniformity in the civil laws of the land so that no community is discriminated against or favoured by the state in the eyes of the law. Moreover, for the progress of the Indian society as a whole, it is necessary to have a common civil code for all citizens. For example, as per the Indian Penal Code a Hindu or Parsi or Christian husband can be convicted for bigamy. But Muslims are excluded from this law because polygamy is recognised as a valid institution amongst their community. Thus while bigamy is a penal offence, Muslims enjoy exclusion from it. Apart from polygamy, another core issue is the divorce system (triple *talaq* or otherwise) among the Muslims. Hindus and Christians cannot secure divorce so easily. It has been constantly said that there was no reason why the Muslim community was not given the benefit of social reforms regarding bigamy and divorce. Two of the more important features of a uniform civil law of course would be a ban on polygamy and instant *talaq*. This will not only give greater security to Muslim women, but also prevent irresponsible Hindu males from embracing Islam just to be able to marry more than one woman. Polygamy and instant *talaq* are both sanctioned by the Shariat law. Both are loaded in favour of Muslim men. Muslim women are sufferers.

c10.s2.2

*Woman in Islam* "Men have preeminence above women because God has made them superior to the latter. Also men spend their money... Good wives are obedient to men... Those who disobey you, first advise them politely to behave themselves. If they do not improve, stop sleeping with them. If even then they do not improve, beat them up...," says the Quran.¹⁰ The Quran also imposes elaborate veil on women. Momins are instructed to tell their wives and daughters to cover themselves with veil when going out.¹¹ "Enjoin believing women to keep their eyes low, to preserve their chastity, to cover their adornments, to draw their veils over their bosoms and not to reveal their finery."¹² Women were primarily meant to procreate, to produce Muslims. "Your wives are as a tilth unto you. So approach your tilth when and how you will" - by ploughing, sowing and raising crops, says the Quran. Or, "Your women are your field - go unto them as you will."¹³ Woman in Islam is not regarded as a person but as a field. Her husband cultivates it and reaps the harvest, for the harvest belongs to the proprietor. She is nothing but her husband's domain. Women could be beaten up for disloyalty and sexual non-comformity.¹⁴

c10.s2.3

No wonder, with such freedom on the part of men and such restrictions on the part of women, believers took to marrying freely from the very beginning of Islam. It is common knowledge that in Islam a man can marry four wives and possess numberless concubines. According to a tradition of Abu Abbas, the Prophet had said: "in my Ummah, he is the best who has the largest number of wives." Umar, the second Caliph (581-644 CE) had already married four times before the Hijra; in Medina he married five more times, the last when he was sixty. Umar said: "Prevent women from learning to write; say no to their capricious ways... Adopt positions opposite those of women. There is great merit in such opposition." At 57 Umar married Umm Kulsum, daughter of Ali and Fatima. Ali (600-661) was the Prophet's cousin and the fourth Caliph. He said: "The entire woman is an evil and what is worse is that it is a necessary evil... You should never ask a woman her advice because her advice is worthless. Hide them so that they cannot see other men." Islam was the first to impose the elaborate veil on women. Other *ahadis* advised likewise. In many of these women are depicted as fitna (evil). The Prophet said that "After me I will not leave any greater *fitna* for men than women". Women are *naqis-ul-aql* and *naqis-ul-* *din*. They are found in hell in large numbers. Men will be destroyed on account of women.¹⁵

c10.s2.4

In short, there was a spate of marriages, flood of divorces, lot of restrictions and damaging diatribes against women among the faithful. Ali's son, al-Hasan, the brother of al-Husain of the Karbala fame, had won a highly individual title for himself: "the great divorcer." He died at the age of forty-five and he had by that time succeeded in making and unmaking no less than one hundred marriages. Al-Hasan had twenty children, fifteen sons and five daughters, from whom are descended one section of the great Saiyyads.¹⁶ It is well known that polygamy and jihad helped Muslim expansion and colonization. "No wonder that in the annals of history, Muslim imperialism probably endured the longest."¹⁷

c10.s2.5

This was a great achievement of Islam. But it also resulted in damnation of half of the Muslim population, that of Muslim women, droves of whom had been obtained in Jihad. They were declared to be inferior to men in every way. They were to be freely beaten. "Wife-beating was perhaps already there, but Islam brought to it a heavenly sanction."¹⁸ Testimony of two women was considered equal to that of one man. In matters of sex man's desire was all that mattered. Captured women were like slaves or concubines or "what your right hand possesses". They were meant for amusement of Muslim men. Women could be married at will and divorced at will. No explanation was needed for divorcing a woman. "Islam has always considered women as creatures inferior in every way: physically, intellectually, and morally. This negative vision is divinely sanctioned in the Koran, corroborated by the hadiths and perpetuated by the commentaries of the theologians, the custodians of Muslim dogma and ignorance."¹⁹ In short, polygamy is a crucial point of Muslim Personal law.

c10.s2.6

*Stir for Muslim Women's Liberation*

c10.s2.7

It is noteworthy that a debate is going on among the Muslims themselves about having a second look at the Shariat laws regarding women and divorce, alimony and maintenance. But it is a low key controversy. For, the Prophet's revelations are final. The laws have been issued. Other societies adopt new laws as the need arises, as traditions change. This is not possible in Islam. "Islamic laws on marriage and divorce are not just social legislations... They are revealed truths, Allah's commands. To seek to change them is... rebellion against God." All that a Muslim can do is to 'reinterpret' the Prophet's decrees - by itself not an easy task. For example, Zafar Jung's article "Islamic law needs to be revised", ends by saying that the change should be in the spirit of the pristine purity of Islam. Abdul Moghni (Patna) reacting to Zafar Jung's article says: "It can be improved upon only by authentic Islamic scholars and accredited institutions rather than by the so-called secularists who are ignorant of Islam and its laws."²⁰ "Consequently and as usual, all debate ends where it begins - everything is to be thought and done within the permissible limits of Islam."

c10.s2.8

The debate has not remained confined to men alone. Farida Rahman, an active feminist, jurist and a member of parliament of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party, demanding women's share in property said: "I do not advocate that the holy Koran should be rewritten but I do demand that there be equal rights for men and women and that is why 1 would circumvent the laws laid down in the Koran in this particular case." For this remark Bangladesh fundamentalist leader Maulana Fazlul Huq Amini demanded her death - "Farida Rahman being a Muslim must be hanged for speaking against the holy Koran."²¹ A fatwa has been issued against her for demanding equality between men and women. Farida Rahman is safe(?) outside Islamic Bangladesh as she has sought refuge in Sweden. Riffat Hassan is also safe outside Pakistan. Born and brought up in Lahore, Riffat presently is a professor of religious studies in the United States. According to her the activities of Muslim fundamentalist groups throughout the world and especially in Afghanistan, Iran, Egypt, Sudan and Bangladesh have strengthened the view that Islam cannot coexist with liberal attitudes. Riffat Hasan is out to demolish the stereotype of a partriarchal Islam. Her struggle is against fundamentalists especially in Muslim majority states who are "working overtime to make Muslim women faceless and nameless".²²

c10.s2.9

The demand that "Farida Rahman being a Muslim must be hanged for speaking against the holy Koran", is in keeping with the Islamic tradition. But Farida Rahman rightly raises her voice against the attempt to humiliate and ridicule Muslim women and make them helpless and faceless. Two examples of this attitude may be cited. A news item from Dhaka says that "A radical Muslim priest has offered love and marriage to Bangladesh's most controversial feminist writer, Taslima Nasreen, in order to bring her to the faith". "She will be my third wife," said Mr. Rahim Baksh, an Islamic cleric in Cox's Bazar town in southeastern Bangladesh.²³ Another: "One of the most pathetic stories told during a recent video magazine programme on the triple *talaq* controversy was that of a middle aged Muslim woman who recounted how a group of mullahs laughed at her when she took her complaint about her marriage to them. She felt so helpless, she said, in a room full of bearded clerics - all men, of course - laughing at her plight and making it abundantly clear that she was living in a man's world where her grievances against her husband would bring no relief."²⁴ it is clear that the iron law of the fundamentalists still has the community in its grip, preventing the articulation of any views or the adoption of any behaviour which carry a hint of non-conformism. Since all Muslims, including the liberals, seem resigned to let the bigots rule the roost, it only helps their opponents to buttress the case against their closer assimilation in Indian society. Any possibility of a successful rebellion against the medieval concepts is out of the question in the Islamic countries, but not totally unfeasible in an open polity like India's. But the initiative has to come from within the Muslim community, declare secularist political parties.

c10.s2.10

In a free country like India, Muslim women sometimes speak out. A few days ago a group of Muslim women took out a procession in Mumbai. They were protesting against polygamy and triple *talaq* as practised by Muslim men. Their delegation also met the Chief Minister Mr. Manohar Joshi. Working women stated that sometimes when they returned home late from workplace, their husbands pronounced *talaq* and in a moment they were rendered homeless and helpless. For a woman's right of inheritance is illusory. The concept of alimony is unknown is Islam, and the Quran sanctions maintenance for the customary period of *iddat*.²⁵ Manohar Joshi promised to look into their problems sympathetically. What followed was published as a news item in *The Times of India*, Mumbai, dated 30 April 1997. "The Samajwadi Party has protested against chief minister Manohar Joshi's, assertion that his government would introduce a uniform civil code in Maharashtra... Samajwadi Party spokesman Nasir Jamal said here on Tuesday that Mr. Joshi's statement had 'created a feeling of insecurity among the Muslim masses'. 'Several Muslim organisations are planning to come together and jointly oppose any move to impose a uniform code,' he added. Mr. Jamal appealed to the Shiv Sena-Bharatiya Janata Party government not to 'tamper with Muslim religious laws'.²⁶ So even a talk of reform creates a feeling of insecurity among the Muslims. A similar attempt of Kerala *talaq* victims to fight against polygamy through their newly formed forum 'Nisha' (Nisa in Arabic means women) and the movement called 'Makkal Samaram' (stir by children for share in fathers' property) are also facing rough weather from the orthodox section of the Muslim community.²⁷

c10.s2.11

The remedy for most of such problems lies in having a common civil code for all citizens. This was realised by the framers of the Constitution of India. Article 44 of the Constitution says: "The state shall endeavour to secure for the citizens a uniform civil code throughout the territory of India." Many a time aggrieved parties (like divorced Muslim women) have approached the courts for redressal and many a time the Supreme Court has asked the government to explain the steps it has taken for securing uniformity in the personal laws, particularly those of the Muslims, leading to the enactment of a common civil code for all Indians.

c10.s2.12

Many Muslims in India, both liberal and orthodox, are engaged in a debate on the merits of prohibition of polygamy and triple *talaq* and many other matters like adoption and inheritance and the desirability of having a common civil code. But since the demand for a uniform civil code comes from the Hindu forums also, it is resisted by Muslims in general and mullahs in particular. Muslims are generally allergic to the advocacy by Hindus of a common civil code. They consider it an interference of non-Muslims in the personal laws of Islam. That is why Nasir Jamal appealed particularly to "Shiv Sena-Bharatiya Janata Party government not to tamper with Muslim religious laws". Any innovation or change is taboo in Islam because it is believed that the best code of laws for "all humanity and for all time" has already been sent by God fourteen hundred years ago and any suggestion for change is not only irrelevant but also "creates a feeling of insecurity among Muslims". Some Hindus in anger say: "Let them go to hell; let them stew in their own juice." But Indian society cannot progress if the condition of only some women (Hindu) improves through reform while the Muslim women are left out. If the society has to progress it has to progress as whole; there has to be a uniform civil code for all. The Bharatiya Janata Party wants enactment of a common civil code. The Congress Party opposes it. This is party politics, a basic of democracy. That is how Nasir Jamal's contention in Mumbai gets support from the Congress. Mr. Gurudas Kamat, a member of the interim committee overseeing the affairs of the Mumbai unit of the Congress, said that "the Congress would vehemently oppose any move to bring in the code. According to him the Sena was trying to create fear in the minds of the minorities in the state." It is well known that the Hindu secularists help Muslim fundamentalists in keeping the banner of instant *talaq* and polygamy flying. "Union government has already expressed its helplessness in enacting a common Uniform Civil Code (UCC ), applicable to all the religious communities. It feels that such a legislation would be against its policy not to interfere with the personal laws of minority communities... The government maintains that until the initiative for change comes from the community, it cannot interfere with its personal laws."²⁸ The problem of enactment of a uniform civil code has become a grinding stone placed round the neck of the country. The political parties, the Parliament and state legislatures, the judiciary - from lower courts to the Supreme Court -, the intelligentsia, the media, the ulema have all got involved with it in one way or the other, but there seems to be no way out. It is true that a few Muslim women seek relief from law courts,²⁹ but naturally not all the aggrieved parties can take their problems to the courts all the time. The courts themselves are handicapped because of variance of religious laws of so many faiths and ask the government what steps are being taken to implement the provision of the Constitution "to secure for the citizens uniform civil code throughout the territory of India".

c10.s2.13

It is necessary to admit that social reforms are not easy to effect. The more things change the more they remain the same. There is inevitability of gradualness in the field of social reform. In the West the Christians have moved a little faster, or so it appears. They have both the will to change and the determination to move forward. Hindus possess the will but change but little. They are aware of the evils in their society and pass laws to remove them. Laws have been enacted against untouchability, against child marriage, against demanding dowry, against begging, against child labour, against employment of children in hazardous industries, and in a dozen other areas. This shows the zeal of the Hindus in establishing a better social order. But in actual fact little change in these fields has come about, if things have not actually deteriorated. Some "progressive" Muslims sometimes talk of change with regard to rules of polygamy, divorce, adoption, inheritance etc. But other equally "progressive" Muslims oppose any such move. (The indoctrinated, poor and uneducated Muslims of course have no opinion to offer.) So they do the next best thing - defend everything Islamic. In place of improving the lot of their women, they assert that the status of women in Islam is the best, that their divorce rules are the best, and that their education in madrasas is correct and complete. They claim that their social rules enacted fourteen hundred years ago in the desert land of Arabia in the camel age are good in all countries for all times. If there is any suggestion from outside, they consider it an interference in their Personal Law.

c10.s2.14

As has been discussed in detail earlier, Islam has little to do with democracy. It does not concede equal status to Muslims and non-Muslims. In a Muslim state non-Muslims do not enjoy human rights as defined in modem times. Muslim religious and political leaders repeatedly claims that the Shariat laws and fatwas of Muftis have greater sanctity for Muslims than provisions of the Indian Constitution.

c10.s2.15

Although this attitude in many ways comes in the way of Muslims joining India's national mainstream, it does not debar them from enjoying the advantages flowing from Indian democracy. The Constitution of India provides for special consideration to the minorities and Muslims take full advantage of this situation. Besides, democracy is based on elections. Muslim voters take advantage of such a situation and minorityism flourishes in India through the assistance of some 'secularist' politicians and betrayal by some intellectuals. All political parties in India run after Muslim votes. This turns Indian democracy into politics of minorityism and vote banks, and helps the Muslims to remain a state within the state - with their own personal laws - and the absence of a uniform civil code keeps the torch of Muslim separatism burning. Still the condition of Muslim women in India is better than that in many Islamic countries for reasons more than one. For one, there is lot of Hindu influence on Muslim culture. *Purdah-less* Muslim women are a common sight. For another, Indian judiciary comes to the rescue of oppressed Muslim women in matters of maintenance and alimony.

c10.s2.16

In many parts of the Middle East women have been increasingly abused for not covering their hair, for going to beaches or for travelling in public transport simply because there was no provision in them for segregating the men from the women. Women working in the public sector were also threatened with death if they did not give up their jobs.

c10.s2.17

According to the findings of the Amnesty International recorded in their latest report, "Women in the Middle East: Human rights under attack", in several Middle East countries women face imprisonment, cruel punishments and even death under the law which is discriminatory and heavily loaded against women. Consequently, from being prosecuted for the clothes they wear or do not wear, women can be locked up for driving a car even.

c10.s2.18

In Saudi Arabia, driving by women has been banned through legislation. The Iranian law, in turn, states that a women should be buried upto her chest for sexual offences while specifying the type of stones that should be used. According to article 104 of the Penal Code which refers to adultery, "In the punishment of stoning to death, the stones should not be too large so that the person dies on being hit by one or two of them; they should not be too small either so that they could not be defined as stones."30

c10.s2.19

While in Iran, both men and women face sentences of flogging and stoning to death for sexual offences for *hudud* offences such as adultery, according to the Amnesty report a large number of women have been executed by being stoned to death. Such executions are of common occurrence. Three men and women were stoned to death in October 1997.31 However, men who kill for the sake of honour are let free. In Iran women also risk arrest and flogging if they fail to obey the dress code. The law provides for 74 lashes for violating the "dress law". Women of course do not observe purdah with women. In women's clubs (Hijab clubs), they can play games, swim, and practice athletics under women coaches, but all Islamic laws are applicable to them. They cannot, according to the Constitution, become presidents, judges or religious leaders. Men can divorce at will. "Women cannot travel without *the written permission* (emphasis added) of their husbands or fathers, and a woman's testimony in court carries just half the weight of man's."³²

c10.s2.20

In Sudan women have been flogged for dressing in the ways that infringe the military Government's law on public morality. The Amnesty International has recorded that a woman living in Omdurman was fined and sentenced to 35 lashes because she was wearing trousers. Another woman a student at Khartoum University who was wearing a blouse and skirt was lashed 25 times for the offence.

c10.s2.21

As Muzaffar Hussain writes, "In Algeria the fanatics are out to brutally subjugate women who have some experience of women's liberty since the French connection. If a Muslim woman is seen without *purdah* or uncovered hair she is shot dead. If a Muslim woman continues in her old attire of the French colonial days of skirt and blouse, her bare legs are exposed to a fusillade of stones and before long she falls a cripple. In 1993-94 according to the official reports about 300 women were killed for various reasons." On March 6, when the rest of the world was celebrating Women's Day, in the very capital city of Algeria 16 women were mowed down for having seen a dramatic performance in a theatre. According to the information available with the UN there are fifty-five million refugees in the world; about forty million of them are Muslims. When a person has to leave his home and hearth and take to an unending road the most severe hardships come to the lot of women. In the world 17,500,00 Muslim women with their 75,00,000 children are roaming in search of shelter. The petrodollar rich Arab and other countries that swear by their Islamic faith have no time to think about them.³³ Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia are considered progressive nations of North Africa. The position of women in other Islamic countries is not better if not worse. Fatima Mernissi, Professor of Sociology, Mohammad V University in Rabat, Morocco, in her book *Islam and Democracy - Fear of the Modern World*, dates "the powerlessness of women to the advent of Islam."³⁴ Still, and as usual, it is claimed that "by comparison, women in Islam were in a much better and more protected position".³⁵ This is true of India but not Islamic countries.

c10.s2.22

Indian 'secularist' politicians join the "minorities" in opposing a common civil code with a view to please the Muslims to garner their votes. They find many other ways for the same reason. One such gesture is the government's granting subsidy on Hajj pilgrimage.

6.3. Hajj Pilgrimage

c10.s3.1

Pilgrimage to Mecca and Medina is a religious obligation on every Muslim. Consequently Hajj pilgrims converge on these holy cities once every year from all over the world. This year (1997) the estimated number of Hajj pilgrims from India totals to about 82,000. Of these about 32,000 went on their own while more than 50,000 persons were government sponsored: in other words their journey to Saudi Arabia was subsidised by the Government of India. There are many Indian Muslims who sell their houses and personal belongings to go to Mecca for Hajj. But we are here concerned with Indian 'secular' government's subsidy of crores of rupees annually *on this pilgrimage*. The Indian Parliament was informed by the External Affairs Minister Mr. Inder Kumar Gujral on 17 March 1997 that "a total of Rs.84.66 crores was spent on subsidising travel of over 1.06 lakh Haj pilgrims from 1994 till 1996."³⁶ The First Report of the Standing Committee on External Affairs (1993-94) approved by the Tenth Lok Sabha, was laid on the table of the House on 19 April 1993. It stated:

c10.s3.2

"An amount of Rs.21 crores is estimated to be spent in 1993-94 for payment to SBI (State Bank of India) on account of foreign exchange released to Haj Pilgrims at official rate of exchange. It has been decided in January, 1993 that the pilgrims will be given foreign exchange at the official rate and the difference between the official and market rate of exchange would be borne through the Ministry of External Affairs' budgetary provision. The difference in the rates of exchange comes to Rs.21 crores.

c10.s3.3

"This year (1993) arrangements have been finalised with Aeroflot carrying pilgrims to Jeddah and back against a sum of Rs.18,000 per pilgrim. A pilgrim would however pay Rs.11,000. For 20,000 pilgrims travelling by air, a sum of Rs.14 crores will have to be set aside as subsidy at the rate of Rs.7,000. Besides a sum of Rs.8.80³⁷ crores approximately will be required to be earmarked for subsidy on 4,700 pilgrims' journey by sea. Facilities extended by the Government of India for the Haj Pilgrims include subsidised fares by sea/air. Haj pilgrims are also exempted from payment of International Airport Tax of Rs.300, a, courtesy which costs the Government Rs.6 lakhs.

c10.s3.4

"Government of India also sends a 45 members team of medical/paramedical personnel for the duration of Haj every year. 6 Assistant Haj Officers and 8 Haj Assistants are being sent for the assistance of pilgrims during the Haj. Medicines worth Rs.7.17 lakhs have also been sent for the Hajis. All these and the additional staff recruited locally by the CGI Jeddah for the assistance of the pilgrims during the Haj season and the regular Haj establishment in Indian consulate cost Government of India Rs.1.02 crores every year.

c10.s3.5

"The Committee desire that while maintaining the services for the welfare of the Indian Haj pilgrims while in Saudi Arabia at an adequate level, the Government should progressively reduce and eventually eliminate the element of subsidy on their transportation to and from India. The Committee, however, do not see any justification for the newly instituted subsidy on the purchase of foreign exchange by the pilgrims."[38](#page_38)

c10.s3.6

But in the place of progressively reducing the subsidy, the government is spending more and more on Hajj pilgrims. The number of Hajj pilgrims over the years has been on the increase. Earlier only 18 to 22 thousand pilgrims used to go from India. Last year, it was 50 thousand which swelled to 82 thousand this year. This year, 1997, the government's expenditure on Hajj has been reported to Parliament as being Rs.93 crore. A fire in the pilgrim's camp has killed more than 200 Indian pilgrims and injured an unspecified number, some critically. Doctors, medicines and goodwill missions have been rushed to the site. The government has promised to pay rupees one lakh each to the kin of the dead and the disabled. All this would come to a hundred crores. A country which has millions of people under poverty line to feed can ill afford such generosity. Giving of so much subsidy by the "Secular Government" for a religious minority puts a question mark on its credibility. For, it was the secularist Jawaharlal Nehru who introduced the Haj Bill in Parliament in 1959 to facilitate and subsidise Muslim pilgrims visiting Mecca. But, as seen above, it has now grown into a monster costing the Government 93 crores in 1997 alone. In addition to the Central Government, many State Governments and large cities like Mumbai, Bangalore and Delhi run Hajj Centres at taxpayers' expense.

c10.s3.7

There is also loss of revenue to Air India, the official government owned airlines. The dislocation in its normal services due to Hajj adversely affects its finance and reputation. Scores of flights are specially arranged to fly from Mumbai, Delhi, Chennai, Hyderabad and Thiruanantapuram to carry the pilgrims to Jeddah. And the Air Carriers have to return empty, obviously. On the reverse journey, Carriers fly empty to Jeddah to bring back the pilgrims from there. Newspapers are full of details of losses incurred by the government airlines every year. One report by Srinivas Laxman in *The Times of India* News Service, 24 March 1997, on the problem would suffice:

c10.s3.8

"Mumbai: Air-India's international flight schedules have been badly hit following diversion of several aircraft for Haj. Sources in A-I admitted that the diversion of aircraft had affected its flight schedules. This has tarnished the airline's image... He expressed helplessness saying the decision to divert aircraft was taken at the political level. A-I would now operate 142 special Haj flights for transporting 55,000 pilgrims. The Haj season is expected to end on May 21 and the special flights have forced A-I to drastically curtail its services, even to some of the lucrative destinations... The disruption in A-I services has been severely criticised by travellers and foreign tour operators. A foreign tour operator, who requested anonymity, said: The credibility of the airline has taken a severe drubbing again because of the suspension of services."

c10.s3.9

Dhananjayan K. Machingal, president of a German travel agency, was stated to have described the flight suspensions as a "political ploy" aimed at a vote bank in India. He is further quoted as saying that A-I was the "number one obstacle" to be surmounted for promoting India as an international tourist destination.

c10.s3.10

So revenue from Air India is lost, its flight-credibility suffers and Indian tourism gets a beating besides the Government losing crores of rupees on subsidising Hajj pilgrimage. This is not the end of the story. A few ships ply between the mainland and Andamans and numerous other small islands carrying essential supplies to those living on the islands. During the Hajj season some of these ships are diverted to carry pilgrims to Saudi Arabia. This results in acute shortage of necessities of life for island people including servicemen. So even the country's security is made subservient to vote bank politics.

c10.s3.11

On the other hand, the income to Saudi Arabia from Hajj every year is considerable, and this pilgrimage will keep it rich always, even if its oil reserves dry up. Because of this the Saudis have an old feud with Iran and Libya, with regard to the Muslim holy cities. Iranian police and pilgrims fought with Arab police in the main mosque in 1987. Libya wants Mecca and Medina to be declared as international townships, with the status of 'Vatican', arguing that they are common property of all Muslims.

6.4. Imams as Government Servants

c10.s4.1

Concessions to Muslims do not stop at Hajj subsidy. In the medieval period the Muslim state in India maintained the staff of the mosques at the expense of the royal exchequer. We have already said that Muslim state in India has not ceased to exist, so that the union government has taken the first step fixing regular pay scales for 1.15 lakh imams leading prayers in the various mosques across the country. The beneficiaries are 26,000 'alims' 46,000 'hafiz' and 43,000 'nazrah'. For implementation of this decision the government would have to bear an estimated expenditure of Rs.243 crores. Besides for coming three years an additional Rs.405 crores would be paid to the three categories of imams. Under the scheme, *imam alim*'s pay scale will be Rs.1,000-1,600, *imam hafiz*'s Rs.950-1,550, *imam nazrah*'s Rs.850-1,400 and *muazin*'s Rs. 800-1,400. In addition, Rs.30 per month will also be paid to the imams as medical allowance. Although these scales have been finalised, it has specifically been stated that the Wakf Board in charge of a state can pay higher scales. At least 1.15 lakh *imam alim*, *imam hafiz*, *imam nazrah* and *muazin* would get about rupees one lakh each towards back-wages and arrears since the court accepted the All India Imam Organisation (AIIO)'s plea for fixing their salaries. The governments' decision to frame a salary scheme for imams has been made despite the attorney-general's strong dissent that the state can neither promote a religion nor have one to nurture it. The governments' decision is being seen as a move to woo the imams for the elections which are round the corner.³⁹ During Muslim rule masjids of course were government institutions, and preachers and readers were paid from the state treasury.⁴⁰ Plan of making payment of salaries to imams today would also make them government servants.

c10.s4.2

But there is always a slip between the cup and the lip. The ruling party's plan to garner Muslim votes by paying salaries to imams of masjids alerted other political parties also. They also offered a deal and a better one at that. Muslim leaders also felt shy of the community's religious heads accepting such open inducement. They protested against the imams serving as government agents by accepting a salary from it. The Congress Party which had made the original offer also lost elections and went out of office. The case of making the imams salaried servants was shelved (for the time being?). But the project of payment speaks for itself. It tells (a) how a political party calling itself secular craves for Muslim communal votes, and (b) how the Muslims try to derive the best advantage from India's secular democracy.

c10.s4.3

Modern democracy is based on elections. Come elections (and they come so often), and Muslim leaders, religious and secular, are approached for support by individuals and political parties. Various Muslim outfits by themselves descend in the election arena to advocate the cause of the 'minority' community. The Shahi imam of Jama Masjid, Delhi, has been a keen participant in election politics and shown the way to Muslim clergy, maulanas, imams and overseers of *dargahs* to participate in electoral politics. Muslim votes account for a good percentage of the electorate, ranging from 10 to 35 or even 40 percent in some constituencies. Like any other community, they are divided on political issues. "The only point of agreement among the minority voters is their antipathy to the BJP..."⁴¹ The Congress and now the United Front is ever ready to exploit this mullah reserve for their anti-BJP party politics. Incidentally, by giving prestige to the mullahs and maulvis and by giving them a platform of anti-BJPism, 'secular' parties rekindled amongst them the Jihadist mentality which was never dormant and had witnessed the holocausts of Calcutta and Noakhali. The terrorist activities of Jihadist outfits from Kashmir to Kerala via Coimbatore are a direct result of this secularist syndrome. Secularist politicians and intelligentsia find it easy to enjoy power and influence by not criticising infiltrators, smugglers and other anti-national elements. They find it profitable to attack Hindus only and call them communalists.

6.5. Friday Congregational Service

c10.s5.1

Curiously enough in the Indian state as in any Muslim state the mosque is a place of religious prayer and political activity. Friday sermon is the imam's 'Order of the Day'. It is so today in the Jama Masjid of Delhi as well as all other important masjids in the country. In the Delhi Jama Masjid Prime Minister V.P. Singh of the 'Social justice' fame paid a visit to the Shahi Imam, Syed Abdulla Bukhari. His son Syed Ahmad Bukhari, the Naib Imam, has delivered venomous Friday sermons especially in the wake of the destruction of the disputed Babri structure at Ayodhya in December 1992. A fiery speech was made in early January 1993. The police naturally charged him with sedition and inflaming communal passions by his antinational diatribe. The police filed the charge-sheet without arresting the Naib imam on the ground that it would cause a law and order problem. Pampered by the Prime Ministers, these imams have developed a clout. The court issued summons and later on non-bailable warrants against the accused, but Ahmad Bukhari obtained a stay on the proceedings from the High Court.

c10.s5.2

Even while Ahmad Bukhari's plea is pending in the High Court, the secular Government headed by H.D. Deve Gowda instructed the Delhi Lieutenant Governor to move the court for the withdrawal of the case against the Naib imam on the plea that dropping of sedition charge against him would help create a peaceful atmosphere in society. This step so alarmed the Hindus living in the Jama Masjid area that one Shyam Lal resident of Sita Ram Bazar and four others in his vicinity, moved an application in the court of the Metropolitan Magistrate opposing the withdrawal of the case. Shyam Lal pleaded that the people living in the area were terribly scared following the speech of Ahmad Bukhari and therefore the case should not be dropped against the Naib imam.

c10.s5.3

While it is rumoured that the decision to withdraw the case on the part of the United Front Government was due to a deal seeking Bukhari's support in Uttar Pradesh elections, the terror inspired by this centre of religio-political activity is due to many more reasons. Thousands of Muslims assemble in one place and collection of such a crowd generates a feeling of fright. The roads in front of the mosque are blocked on Friday afternoon. The *namazis* who assemble for prayer overflow into the adjoining streets, hindering movement of people and flow of traffic. This problem is acute in Mumbai. Then there are microphones. They screech loudly to call the Muslims to prayer. This problem is a headache for the government in Calcutta. One has only to see on any Friday the deployment of police force in the environs of the main mosques to realise that the Jama Masjid is a symbol of Muslim state within the Indian state. On collective prayers days like Idul-zuha and Idul-fitr, or on any Friday afternoon the whole atmosphere inspires awe into the hearts of the peaceful people of the vicinity. But this is no problem with 'secular' parties. Their problem is winning elections.

6.6. Extra-Territorial Loyalty

c10.s6.1

Islam is an exotic religion in India. It was born outside and was imposed upon India by waves of conquering armies which periodically inundated the country. Throughout the history of Muslim rule in India, distinguished soldiers, scholars, administrators, merchants and sufis came from abroad and remained loyal to their homelands. Muslims of foreign extraction and even of indigenous birth looked to foreign Islamic lands for guidance and support. Muslim scriptures teach a Muslim that he belongs to the world of Islam. Love of a non-Muslim country, even if it be the country of his birth, is not incumbent upon him. Islamdom (*umma*) is more important for him than nationalism. We have written about the psychology developed by this philosophy in the preceding pages. Therefore, for modern times, only one or two examples may suffice of their extra-territorialism.

c10.s6.2

*The Times of India*, Bombay edition of 29 August 1925, published the following report which speaks for itself. "The Muslims of Bombay, including every sect, observed Friday as Yowmud-Dua by a general hartal by suspending all business in the city and offering special prayers after the usual Jumma prayers for the liberation of Medina from the horrors of the Wahabis. Prayers were offered in every mosque during the afternoon. The spiritual feeling with which they have been drawn to the Holy Places, especially the tomb of the Prophet at Medina, was demonstrated by the fact that they went in procession to the Jumma Masjid in Shaikh Memon Street and the Hamidia Masjid at Pydownie. The Muslim quarters of the city presented a gloomy appearance as a result of the suspension of business." Such sorrow is not always gloomy. it takes an angry and aggressive form with dire consequences for the victims. A few years ago the al-Aqsa mosque was damaged during Arab-Israel tension. The event had nothing to do with India or Indians. But Indian Muslims without any provocation at home indulged in lot of rioting and destroyed Hindu temples in many places.

First 49 of 233 passages. Read on

Cites (8)