Showing posts with label prophet. Show all posts
Showing posts with label prophet. Show all posts

5.2.12

Sunday ka Funda

It is better to sit alone than in company with the bad; and it is, better still to sit with the good than alone. It is better to speak to a seeker of knowledge than to remain silent; but silence is better than idle words.

- Prophet Mohammed

Eid-e-Milad, I must confess, was never a date on my calendar. It did not have the preamble of Ramzan Eid or Bakri Eid. It was quiet. I thought those who were deeply religious were introspecting about the Prophet's life. It was one way to celebrate a birthday.

I was surprised to read that it has become a huge commercial enterprise. Business thrives in the gullies selling badges, buntings, flags, tassels. And Muslims talk about how idolatory is against the faith. What is this, then?

Most Arabs do not celebrate their own birthdays. It is a way of not deifying one's existence. But, then, all prayers also deify. And, again, I confess that some of the naats are beautiful. For, it goes beyond obeisance. It is suffusing of oneself in a larger Self.

I do not understand the language of this one. It is probably not even great. But I like the slow rhythm, the lack of self-conscioues rendition one has become accustomed to.



6.9.10

The Kerala Professor and the Sharia

This is the sort of news that revolts, irrespective of the questions that will be raised.

In a gruesome incident, suspected religious extremists chopped off the right hand of TJ Joseph, a Malayalam professor at Newman’s College, under suspension since March for allegedly preparing a question paper with derogatory references to Prophet Muhammad, at Muvattupuzha in Ernakulam district on Sunday morning. The police took into custody 15 persons, reportedly activists of Islamist resistance outfit NDF (presently Popular Front of India), for questioning.

How many people were aware of such an organisation? Is the state government not supposed to keep a check on them? There were already protests in March after the question paper controversy. Why did the attackers wait till July?

There is no scope for dilly-dallying here. They had absolutely no business to harm the professor or even threaten him. If they were disturbed by the references to the Prophet, they could have used legal recourse. This group has been bundled as an Islamist outfit. Had they been true believers they would not have conducted this horrific act in the month of Ramzan. They are just criminals who probably have political aspirations.

I am aware that someone will turn around and say that they are only upholding the spirit of Islam and jihad. The BJP has jumped in already:

Demanding an NIA probe into the attack on the college professor, Kerala BJP president V Muraleedharan asked the Home Ministry not to encourage Talibanism in the State. “The Thodupuzha incident proves that Islamic terrorism has strengthened in Kerala. We are not blaming any particular outfit for that. But a tendency to nurture Talibanism should not be there,” he said in Thiruvananthapuram.

As someone quite familiar with Kerala, I can say that this was one state that seemed to be the least communal. Regionalism, too, was limited. You could hardly every tell the community to which a Keralite belonged – they speak the same language, dress in similar fashion, eat the same food. They are liberate and well-read as well. The Gulf traffic proved to be an economic boom and irrespective of what faith they believed in, they all constructed hideous-looking houses when they returned on ‘holydess’.

Would a stray Madani, who incidentally has not yet been found culpable in the Bangalore blasts case, change the attitude of the Keralite?

The chopping of the professor’s hand is a judicial matter. If this group was trying to follow the Sharia, then there is no place for it in India. They have to follow the Constitution. As I said, if the reference to the Prophet has bothered them, then they should take up the matter with the authorities. I do not know what prompted the professor to make derogatory references in a language paper. The college is a Christian one and affiliated to the Mahatma Gandhi University. And he was sacked. Why? Did the authorities think he had done something wrong? Was that probed? The dismissal took effect from September 1.

Who are these lumpen elements, then? Why did they wait for all these months? I hope they are arrested and given adequate punishment. More importantly, I hope they are arrested on charges of threatening, attacking and causing bodily harm.

Just as I believe they should be tried according to the Indian Constitution, their accusers should not try them in their kangaroo courts on charges of ‘Talibanism’. It’s not there in our statute books. And the family’s forgiveness in July does not count.

The case should have been solved by now. Is his dismissal more damaging? Will it get more attention?

29.7.09

The Pope and the Prophet

Two bits of religious news and let us see the reactions…

A Scottish art exhibition invited visitors to deface a copy of the Bible. The exhibit, Untitled 2009, is part of the ‘Made In Gods Image’ exhibition at the Gallery of Modern Art in Glasgow and was thought up by local artist Anthony Schrag. The intention was for gays and transsexuals who felt left out of religion to write their way back in to the holy book. But visitors offered pens by gallery staff had other ideas, and have scrawled a series of obscene remarks.


Is art beyond the realm of social discourse? Would one consider it as a political commentary that seeks to exclude certain segments of people because of their other beliefs and actions? Have we not heard about incidents of homosexuality within the Church?

The flip side is this: Why does the gay community wish to belong to a faith system that is mainstream when they are not? Does writing obscene remarks lessen their feeling of being left out?

Apparently, after the Pope’s objection, the Bible has been placed in a locked case and visitors can write their comments on blank sheets of paper. They may as well have a meeting or seminar. Incidentally, copies of the Bible, as I am sure other scriptures, are distributed freely. At least, I got several copies from back in my school days to a couple of years ago. How would anyone know whether or not I would treat it with any respect? Do those with evangelical fervour think for a moment that what they deem holy could mean nothing to another and that itself is a sort of defilement?

I don’t find such art particularly interesting or enlightening or even a potent commentary. However, the Church could just have taken up the issue for what it is. Instead, this is what a report states:

The adviser to the head of the Catholic Church said the project was disgusting and offensive. They would not think of doing it to the Koran, he added.


Who are the ‘they’? Who flushed the Koran down the toilet? Who published those Danish cartoons? If people did react, they were immediately termed Islamists, jihadis and intolerant. Some of us who took a view that a religion for its believers must be large enough to withstand such onslaughts were also called jihadis!

So, let us deal with an issue closer to home.

The Prophet’s picture has found its way in a Hindi book chapter in Uttar Pradesh on different religious figures who have contributed to humanity (Manav Uthaan ke Liye Vibhinn Dharmo ka Yogdaan). Islam does not permit publication of the pictures of the Prophet, according to a report. A clarification. There are no pictures available or even ancient artistic impressions. And, yes, the religion does not allow such depictions because it does not believe in iconography. That is the reason I have often mentioned tombs being unIslamic.

Yuvraj Dutt, the writer, said the Prophet’s picture was available on the internet and was downloaded from there. Incidentally, the picture was added in the third edition of the book in 2009.


It begs the question: why now? Obviously, they knew it was not exactly the done thing. What is the motive? Why this desperate urge to give a face to the Prophet? Because politics needs something.

Ex-state minister and SP leader Ujjawal Raman Singh threatened that the party would take to the streets and also raise the issue in the assembly if the photograph was not removed.


Please note the name of this gentleman. He is not a Muslim protecting his faith. Just as the first person to call for a ban on Satanic Verses was Khushwant Singh, a Sikh.

And this is my beef. I may well say that it is no big deal, but once it is made an issue of then do not expect silence. The Pope makes a noise; the maulvis will too. And the saffron guys do it as well when their god images, which are used artistically often, are distorted in any manner.

Oh, we speak about madrassas and how only religion is taught there. Here are students in a Mumbai school praying to the snake god:

21.6.09

Do we care what Sharukh Khan thinks of the Prophet?

He can say what he wants and I find both sides talking utter rubbish.

Those who are taking up for him come up with the same old argument that the Prophet would forgive him. Please. Prophets and gods and other religious figures need to concentrate on more important issues, like there is very little water left in the dams in Mumbai and if we don’t get rain on time many people, mostly the poor, will suffer a great deal. Do something about that.

Those who say he is wrong have gone and filed a FIR (First Information Report) against him for using “unparliamentary language” against Prophet Mohammed.

When the Prophet lived there was no Parliament or parliamentary language, no Bollywood, no stupid Lifestyle magazines trying to ask supposedly profound questions to celebrities about religion and politics and history.

Who are these Muslim groups that spring up and decide what Islam is?

They say they won’t bury him in Maharashtra. Was the Prophet Maharashtrian or something?

Why does the media ask him about Islam? He is not a scholar or commentator or a victim of riots. It is a stupid interview.

Q: According to you, who is the most impressive figure in history?

A: There are lots of them, some negative ones like Hitler, then Napoleon, Winston Churchill and if I can call it history, then Prophet Mohammed and from recent time — Nelson Mandela. And there are the nice ones like Gandhiji and Mother Teresa.

The question was about history, not religion. Both sides are ignorant. You might well say that religions have historical roots, fine. But we do not discuss the war of Karbala as history, do we?

It is a badly constructed reply…I mean, “nice ones” for Gandhiji and Mother Teresa! But even if he placed the Prophet alongside Adolf Hitler, it would be his personal viewpoint. I want to ask those Muslims who have been denying the Holocaust on what grounds can they object to this, if indeed it was uttered? If there was no Holocaust then Hitler wasn’t such a bad guy, after all. So, make up your minds and grow up.

Now, Sharukh says there is no more important figure than the Prophet. If he has been misquoted then he should publicly take the person/magazine to court since the matter is so important and he wants to play the perfect Muslim. I wish these people had the courage to stand up for their utterances. If the rich and famous cannot do so, then can you imagine the state of the poor? The Imranas suffer because the powerful guys want to play along. He wants to please the mullahs and the media. He has called it an error in writing, not outright mischievous misreporting. Although, it is clear it is bad writing.

As for the reason touted by those for filing a case against him, if your sentiments are hurt then say a few prayers and ask god for forgiveness on his behalf till he returns from shooting. Later, you could sprinkle as much zam zam on him as you want to purify him. And make sure you call a press conference to project your sad selves as good Muslims.

8.11.08

Zakir Naik and my white kameez

There were big ads in the newspapers, hoardings on billboards. A bearded scrawny man was to give a lecture on Islam and something or the other. I was in Chennai and had nothing to do that evening. I was also interested in the something or the other.

None of the people I asked to join me was keen; finally, a strapping Iranian teen agreed to take me along.

There was one problem. Clothes. I had nothing ‘decent’ to wear. There was no way I was going shopping for this man. Finally, rummaging through the suitcase, at the bottom of it I found one white salwaar kameez and lace dupatta. I think I had been told before I left Mumbai that there may be some function where one might dress up a bit. Ah well, I decided this was the occasion.

My young friend arrived. I went out and he started his motorcycle. I was overjoyed and instead of sitting ladylike, I climbed astride as I would on a horse. We reached the venue and he screeched to a halt. Several mouths opened, eyes went wide. I adjusted my dupatta, which I had wrapped round my waist and tried as demurely as possible to ‘unbike’ myself. If I lifted my right leg, there were people; on the left there were people. So I slid backwards and did something which might make an acrobat proud. Y went to park and as I waited a group of women with scarves and veils approached me to “please come inside, sister”. A gentleman wanted details. “Sister, here, write down address”.

When Y returned, they asked us to go through separate entrances – ladies and gents, like we were queuing up for the loo. I said I wanted to sit with my friend. They looked at me, shocked. Y was a teenager but he was tall and well-built; he even had a stubble.

Seeing that I was determined, they let me sit with him; they were more concerned about the other men and if they’d be uncomfortable. I turned to those in that particular section and asked if they were okay with me. They nodded their heads.

Then Zakir Naik came on stage and there was loud applause. He sat with a few people, including some “foreign dignitaries”. He is a fiery speaker and said some utterly stupid things. The Q & A began and Y had told me to keep quiet and not ask anything. However, as a practising Shia he got very angry and got up to ask some question. Dr. Naik gave some chicken soup for the soul reply.

We left soon after because Y was angry. He made a lot of noise starting the bike. We headed to where I was invited. And this young man who was cross about the Shia faith being insulted guzzled up three large pints of beer in 30 minutes! And I, the religious ignoramus, was thinking about all those words nursing a neembu-paani…okay, a Breezer.

- - -

Anyhow, why am I thinking of Zakir Naik today?

Apparently he has got into trouble. I was secretly thrilled.

A year ago he had said that Allah’s blessings be upon Yazid, the killer of Prophet Mohammed’s grandson Imam Hussein. This time he told a TV channel that Allah alone should be approached for help and not even the Prophet.

Instead of relenting, he stated, “I stand by what I said. And I didn’t commit any sacrilege. The majority of Muslims across the world believe that Allah is the almighty and help should be sought only from him.”

I do not wish to get into a religious twist, but the role of the Messenger in Islam is too sacred. Yet, it is a fact that there are segments that are persecuted because they are branded cults because they believe in one thing and not another. Whatever be his motivation, he is expressing a point of view. Muslims should be happy that in some ways he is unifying them.

It is surprising that Sunnis are against him for this. And so are the Shias.

A Lucknow-based mufti issued a fatwa against him for allegedly supporting Osama bin Laden. Said Naik:

“I never supported Osama. I have always been saying that all those who kill innocents are terrorists. So if the USA kills innocents, it doesn’t have the right to call Osama a terrorist unless it owns up its own crime.”

Again, can we quarrel with this?

I am beginning to think that the white salwaar-kameez was not wasted on him…