A Homeland for Indian Muslims

[Sharma Ji]

Must be some sort of a sarcasm...

No sarcasm there whatsoever.

a uniform civil code will make it less secular...

How so ? virtually every community will have to relinquish their religious rules being constitutionally enshrined.

Mind you, this in no way bans or restricts people from living in accordance to whatever they might believe in.

This does not ban religion and it will be a great step forward and a real evolution of the constitution. It'll go a long ways in transforming us into an enlightened society, fairness, equality, the rule of law.

Also, it's a given, that those (say Muslims, for example) who cling too tightly to their mazhab will just not approach a court of law if they feel better going the local maulvi sharia system for their personal squabbles etc but real aggrieved persons, upon whom wrongs have been committed, will have the option to reach out and seek justice.

Mullahs here are still at the fringe, they have their own few lacs followers and that's about it...even in provinces here is no Mullah led govt.

That makes Pakistan more liberal and tolerant than India, progressive too...isn't it.

Now in India all the liberals and seculars are running helter-skelter and gone underground and barely visible...Sangh and extremists are running the show, and it will only get stronger in coming years and not subside, so your thinking is a bit far fetched.

Extremists are not running any show in India, they remain on the fringe. Just that their voices have been amplified by the opposition in the wake of the country correcting course and rejecting La famiglia raj. The smear jobs have clearly not worked.

Honestly don't know enough about Pakistan and it's internal dynamics but I would be skeptical of any claims about Pakistan being more liberal/tolerant or progressive than India.

Generally, both countries face similar problems and societal ills. Add to that a complicated shared history but overall things are not nearly as bad as described in the OP. The guy is a pretty dubious character anyway, you do know of the twitter drama, right ?

 

[Suriya]

Would it contain provision for Hindu marriages to widely become considered as a social contract that can be broken by a court divorce or would it remain a religious act sanctioned by the gods and remaining for seven life times ??

IS Hindu marriage act which applies for Sikhs, Budh, n jains too based on Hindu religion?

Then why should India Muslims(men) get to enjoy Sharia based personal laws with ancient 7th century traditions of instant triple talaq, four wives, zero maintenance obligation upon divorce, compulsive conversion Islam of non-muslim partner, disregard for legal age of marriage fixed at 18 n marrying off pubescent teen is accepted as legal??

 

[Soumitra]

Would it contain provision for Hindu marriages to widely become considered as a social contract that can be broken by a court divorce or would it remain a religious act sanctioned by the gods and remaining for seven life times ??

Who says Hindu marriage can't be broken by a court mandated divorce?

Section 13 in The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
13 Divorce. —
(1) Any marriage solemnised, whether before or after the commencement of this Act, may, on a petition presented by either the husband or the wife, be dissolved by a decree of divorce on the ground that the other party—
16 [(i) has, after the solemnisation of the marriage, had voluntary sexual intercourse with any person other than his or her spouse; or]
16 [(ia) has, after the solemnisation of the marriage, treated the petitioner with cruelty; or]
16 [(ib) has deserted the petitioner for a continuous period of not less than two years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition; or]
(ii) has ceased to be a Hindu by conversion to another religion; or
17 [(iii) has been incurably of unsound mind, or has been suffering continuously or intermittently from mental disorder of such a kind and to such an extent that the petitioner cannot reasonably be expected to live with the respondent.

Infact it is the Hindus Sikhs Buddhists Chrstians etc who go through court mandated divorce proceedings. Muslim women also have to go through a court. Up until last year Muslim men could legally get an instant divorce (faster than cooking Maggi noodles) now they just have to wait 3 months by pronouncing Talaq once in 3 months instead of just sending an SMS

A simple definition of a secular state is where every religion/group has the freedom to practice their beliefs and religious rituals and that includes the civil codes too.

A state is or purports to be officially neutral in matters of religion, supporting neither religion nor irreligion.

And that church and state should be separated.




Here uniform civil code is undoing of perks and privileges given to minorities related to their own religious practices and the special codes ingrained in their scriptures.

Take for example the Muslim law of inheritance...how can it be superseded by a uniform civil code.

Is US a secular country? Does it have a Uniform Civil Code instead of different personal laws?

As for special codes for minorities which version should be followed?

The Taliban version which bans women education and makes Burqa compulsory?

The Saudi version with strict segregation and male guardianship laws?

The version where Ahmedis are declared as Kafirs even though they are not under the constitution of India?

The Shia version? The Sunni version? The Wahabi version? The Tabliqui Jamat Version?

 

[jamahir]

IS Hindu marriage act which applies for Sikhs, Budh, n jains too based on Hindu religion?

Those technicalities I don't really know.

instant triple talaq

Up until last year Muslim men could legally get an instant divorce (faster than cooking Maggi noodles) now they just have to wait 3 months by pronouncing Talaq once in 3 months instead of just sending an SMS

Firstly, I believe I was the first person on this website to use the phrase "Instant Triple Talaq" and been doing that before the law was passing in the Indian courts forbidding that.

Secondly, this is what I posted on another thread a few days ago :

Divorce is part of Islamic law and this happens over three months. There is a proper procedure. What is not present in Islam is Instant Triple Talaq by uttering "Talaq" consecutively three times over telephone, SMS, email or in person. Such men who do this are not following Islam. They may pray five times a day but if they do Instant Triple Talaq they are not following Islam.

True Islam gave dignity and rights to women in a culture that did not have them. The West gave divorce rights to women only recently. Islam had this 1400 years ago.
​

Who says Hindu marriage can't be broken by a court mandated divorce?

Section 13 in The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
13 Divorce. —
(1) Any marriage solemnised, whether before or after the commencement of this Act, may, on a petition presented by either the husband or the wife, be dissolved by a decree of divorce on the ground that the other party—
16 [(i) has, after the solemnisation of the marriage, had voluntary sexual intercourse with any person other than his or her spouse; or]
16 [(ia) has, after the solemnisation of the marriage, treated the petitioner with cruelty; or]
16 [(ib) has deserted the petitioner for a continuous period of not less than two years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition; or]
(ii) has ceased to be a Hindu by conversion to another religion; or
17 [(iii) has been incurably of unsound mind, or has been suffering continuously or intermittently from mental disorder of such a kind and to such an extent that the petitioner cannot reasonably be expected to live with the respondent.

This law was inspired by Western law which itself was inspired by Islamic marriage law.

four wives

That is an old arrangement which mostly is not followed. Even when it did exist the law that such an arrangement should be done only if all the wives could be provided for equally.

zero maintenance obligation upon divorce

That is incorrect.

As said before, an Islamic marriage is a social contract that can be dissolved by a divorce.

The wedding is conducted like a modern court marriage. At a minimum, the wedding procedure will have five people : the bride and groom, two witnesses, a qazi who is like a local jugde.

One of the main things discussed in the procedure will be the mahr which is mainly a money amount that is pledged by the groom to be given to the bride in case of a divorce. The mahr is compulsory. The wife may spend it any way she wants after the divorce. So that answers your point.

compulsive conversion Islam of non-muslim partner

That is disregarded by quite a few people. Did Arbaaz Khan convert Malaika ?? In Karntaka, the Congress leader Dinesh Gundu Rao is married to the Muslim, Tabu. Did she convert him ??

disregard for legal age of marriage fixed at 18 n marrying off pubescent teen is accepted as legal??

Tell me, do you really think that a person upon reaching the age 18 at the exact second becomes sensible ?? If a person did become sensible this way then we wouldn't have had all kinds of problems in the world - from hunger to war.

Jalaluddin Muhammad Akbar became the Mughal emperor at the age of 14. Yes, he would have had older advisers but he would not have been an idiot at 14 and until 18.

Why was the age 18 thing adopted in the first place ?? I believe it was a combination of modern feminism, the modern Christian church and the modern male homosexuality who worked in conjunction to declare as sin any sexual relations between teenage opposite genders or a relation between a teenager of one gender and a non-teenager of another gender. For example, just a few years ago a British female teacher in her late 20s was legally punished for having sexual relations with a teenage boy student in her class. Homosexuality-promoting media agencies like Daily Mail called this female teacher as a pedophile.

Take Rajesh Khanna for instance. He married Dimple Kapadia when she was 16. In today's India, Khanna would have been declared a pedophile.

Take Romeo and Juliet as another example. On Google was this :

Romeo is about 14/15 in the beginning of the book. romeo has been said to be anywhere from 18-23 however, regardless of which it is, he is still quite a bit older then Juliet who is only 13. That's a good question, Romeo is supposedly to be around 18 or 19 years old.

Again, in today's world, Romeo would have been declared a pedophile.

Take a third example. I will quote the Wikipedia page for Gabriel Garcia Marquez's book, Love in the time of cholera :

América Vicuña – The fourteen-year-old girl who towards the end of the novel is sent to live with Florentino; he is her guardian while she is in school. They have a sexual relationship, and after being rejected by Florentino and failing her exams, she kills herself. Her suicide illustrates the selfish nature of Florentino's love for Fermina.

Again, what would a moralistic modern female feminist say about this ??

So, instead of following all this modern moralistic nonsense, let us listen to what Nature says in a more nuanced, calm, educated and sensitive manner.

 

[secular.muslim]

It is increasingly clear that Muslims are not welcome in today's India.

And to be fair, let us Muslims accept the hard truth below.

1. Hindus hate us. This includes the secularists. Even the Dalits and lower castes.
2. Sikhs also care two hoots about us, except some photo ops from Khalsa Aid, we are always going to be evil Mooslims to them. The way they forgot their humiliation and continued to serve the Indian state speaks volumes.
3. The Buddhists simply don't seem to care. Where they are a significant part of the population (Leh and Ladakh), they want to toe the Indian and pro Hindu line. They cheer the pogroms against Muslims in Sri Lanka and Myanmar. No point in expecting anything here.
4. Parsis and Christians - The Parsis seem neutral but have not done anything concrete for our plight. Even though they continue to flourish in Iran, their hatred for Muslims remains illogical. But at least they don't go about rioting against us.
The Christians are a disappointment. Even with our similarities, they continue to choose the Hindu side instead of aligning with us. If nothing at least for religious reasons. But alas.

There may be exceptions, but one cannot live a life and make decisions based on exceptions to the Rule.

The only people who can and will support us are Muslims.

Even the secularists and the communists have problem with our La ilaha illalah. So count them out too.

Only Muslims can improve the conditions of Muslims. In India as in anywhere else.

I propose the following. These are just ideas. But ideas are inherently strong. They cannot be extinguished.

1. Muslims need political power. But no political party is strong enough to support us. We should accept this fact and support only those that fight for MUSLIM rights ONLY. No other secularism platform should be tolerated. We have seen what secularism has done to our community. Only Allah swt's Deen is for us.
2. We need the means to defend ourselves. This includes all measures within and without any reference to ANY constitution of ANY country. This right is inalienable and I dont want Muslims to care about local laws. Procure arms anyway possible to defend yourselves.
3. Aggressively proselytize. Dawaah is not just for fashion. There are many people of other religions who are sympathetic to us. We should not be content that they are secular and humane. Their real test will be if they recite the Shahada. If they remain Hindu, they will be a part of the oppressor.
4. Eventually we should try to reach a significant portion of the population. Such that Hindu consolidation is unable to get political victories.
5. If that fails, we need to settle for West Bengal and the North east of India as a Muslim homeland for Indian Muslims. There can be separate Muslim nations created in Kerala, Hyderabad and elsewhere if locals there want.

The Indian Army needs to be defeated and the state authorities need to be tied down for this to happen. It may be necessary to highlight human rights abuses by Hindus as regularly as possible so that UN task forces sanction India. Eventually the economy decline will force a curtailment of the armed forces which may lead to a demoralisation.
Then we will be in a position to ask for independent republics or one amalgamated province of Muslims.

All views are welcome.

In simple words, NOT Possible.

First of all, what can Indian Muslims achieve which they could nt achieve politically in India ? Why do anyone think having a separate homeland will solve the issues ?

Lets have a historical perspective before continuing. Lets see why Muslims are in the state they are in today. In my opinion, during partition, a significant - if not all - majority of the educated, wealthy & politically aware members of the community, in other words, the creamy layer of the community, migrated to Pakistan from north India, namely UP, Bihar, Punjab etc. This
left a vacuum in the leadership for Muslims in that part of India. Hence this leadership vacuum was well utilized by the half baked moulanas and similar crooks, often under the patronage of congress, BSP and lately BJP or other regional parties. One such example is the Delhi Imam. And these Muslims continued to be downtrodden and poor with no political unity or sometimes even not participating in the electoral process of the country there by missing there chance to be heard.
In contrary, Muslims of south, especially in Kerala, Muslims have been very progressive, almost none left for Pakistan during partition and from the beginning itself were very active in main stream politics. Imagine, the total population of Kerala is around 33 million out of which around 25% is Muslims, similar to that of UP where the population is around 200 million and Muslims numbering 43 million. From Kerala, which is a small state, they are sending 2 MPs to parliament. How many from UP and other Indian states Muslims are sending ? Total number of MPs in parliament is 550, so a realistic representation of Muslim MPs should be around 75 ? and we have only 4 or 5 in total ? Who is to be blamed for this ? Even in the last election in UP, if they manage to field a united political front, that fanatic Yogi wont be the chief minister there ?

The above are some of the short comings of Muslims, though I don't deny there is wide spread discrimination. But rooting for a separate home land for Muslims of India is not gonna solve this problems. It will just be another unnecessary bloodshed and mayhem only to result in another weak state(s).
A significant portion of Indian Hindus are still secular. Working out a political front inclusive of all secular parties along with Muslim political consolidation is a lot better than daydreaming about a separate land. Why do we need another weak nation to be ending up only as a pawn in the hands of super powers ?

 

[Suriya]

.

True Islam gave dignity and rights to women in a culture that did not have them. The West gave divorce rights to women only recently. Islam had this 1400 years ago.
​

Divorce was part of Arab marriage custom even before the advent of marriage. Prophet's first wife was a business women on her own right and was older than prophet himself. To say Islam gave dignity and rights to women in a culture that did not have them would be a stretch.

If anything Islam codified those Arab customs and made it stringent. Also put some arbitrary restriction like banning adaptation or allow marrying ex-spouse of step son which considered a taboo even in Arab societies.

 

[jamahir]

If anything Islam codified those Arab customs and made it stringent.

Can't say. Maybe, maybe not.

like banning adaptation

Some years ago I read the Islamic laws regarding making of wills and allowing inheritance. I remember something about adoption. I will read again the laws when I find it on internet.

or allow marrying ex-spouse of step son which considered a taboo even in Arab societies.

Maybe you are right, because such an act would be awkward socially.

 

[N.Siddiqui]

In contrary, Muslims of south, especially in Kerala, Muslims have been very progressive, almost none left for Pakistan during partition and from the beginning itself were very active in main stream politics. Imagine, the total population of Kerala is around 33 million out of which around 25% is Muslims

Something to do with high literacy rate of over 90% for Kerala, more Christian pop. as well than rabid right winged Hindus, and the educated Hindus are more open minded it seems.

And with a large expat population of UAE, Saudia, Qatar, Kuwait and other middle east countries from Kerala, Muslim demographics, means they are well-off.

Is this change a new 15-18 year old phenomena after the money starts pouring or an old one.
And many of the lower caste Dalits converting to Christianity and Islam...don't know why do they call them rice bag converts...doesn't seems right.

 

[Sharma Ji]

rice bag converts...

There are Christians out here who are more fanatical in their wanting people to convert than Muslims have ever been, and that's not a stretch to say that.

Fertile ground, lotsa poverty, poor tribals, people outside of the mainstream working of India as a nation, the poorest of the poor. They are the main targets, give a bit of food and shelter, and quotas based on that identity... and they're happy to become Joseph or whatever.

This greatly angers the Hindu hard right.

End of the day it's a business, the Vatican runs a slick operation.

They're banned from doing business in Pakistan, aren't they ? Why ?

 

[N.Siddiqui]

They're banned from doing business in Pakistan, aren't they ? Why ?

There are many Christian missionary schools and colleges in Pakistan too in many cities...but there are not very many eligible would be converts, no Dalits/OBC/SC/ST in large numbers so they are just into education and philanthropy I guess.

 

[Sharma Ji]

There are many Christian missionary schools and colleges in Pakistan too in many cities...but there are not very many eligible would be converts, no Dalits/OBC/SC/ST in large numbers so they are just into education and philanthropy I guess.

They operate conditionally there though, right ? As in they are explicitly barred from proselytizing, or allowed out 'harvesting souls' in Pakistan.

The rot runs pretty deep here, the Vatican have it's tentacles all over Bharat Mata.

There's also a fair amount of casteism among Christians here, newer converts are often looked down upon and will be relegated to a not very good life either way. A lot of Christians also oppose this conversion madness because, unfortunately, unlike Islam, there isn't a bloody history there, and by and large and for the most part, they tend to be far better adjusted into the Indian/Hindu life here.. somehow.

Muslim leaders are as guilty in driving a wedge between people in India as any right winger BJP neta or far right personality/TV guy/activist..

Go through archives of OP's now notoriously deactivated twitter handle too.

 

[AfrazulMandal]

Go through archives of OP's now notoriously deactivated twitter handle too.

Leave me alone.

 

[El Sidd]

Leave me alone.

When are you chanting go back Indians from West Bengal?

 

[FOOLS_NIGHTMARE]

Leave me alone.

A lesson for all Indian Muslims from our religion.
The Prophet (peace be upon him) also said, “Whoever is killed defending himself is a martyr, whoever is killed defending his family is a martyr, whoever is killed defending his property is a martyr.”

 

[Nilu Pule]

It is increasingly clear that Muslims are not welcome in today's India.

And to be fair, let us Muslims accept the hard truth below.

1. Hindus hate us. This includes the secularists. Even the Dalits and lower castes.
2. Sikhs also care two hoots about us, except some photo ops from Khalsa Aid, we are always going to be evil Mooslims to them. The way they forgot their humiliation and continued to serve the Indian state speaks volumes.
3. The Buddhists simply don't seem to care. Where they are a significant part of the population (Leh and Ladakh), they want to toe the Indian and pro Hindu line. They cheer the pogroms against Muslims in Sri Lanka and Myanmar. No point in expecting anything here.
4. Parsis and Christians - The Parsis seem neutral but have not done anything concrete for our plight. Even though they continue to flourish in Iran, their hatred for Muslims remains illogical. But at least they don't go about rioting against us.
The Christians are a disappointment. Even with our similarities, they continue to choose the Hindu side instead of aligning with us. If nothing at least for religious reasons. But alas.

There may be exceptions, but one cannot live a life and make decisions based on exceptions to the Rule.

The only people who can and will support us are Muslims.

Even the secularists and the communists have problem with our La ilaha illalah. So count them out too.

Only Muslims can improve the conditions of Muslims. In India as in anywhere else.

I propose the following. These are just ideas. But ideas are inherently strong. They cannot be extinguished.

1. Muslims need political power. But no political party is strong enough to support us. We should accept this fact and support only those that fight for MUSLIM rights ONLY. No other secularism platform should be tolerated. We have seen what secularism has done to our community. Only Allah swt's Deen is for us.
2. We need the means to defend ourselves. This includes all measures within and without any reference to ANY constitution of ANY country. This right is inalienable and I dont want Muslims to care about local laws. Procure arms anyway possible to defend yourselves.
3. Aggressively proselytize. Dawaah is not just for fashion. There are many people of other religions who are sympathetic to us. We should not be content that they are secular and humane. Their real test will be if they recite the Shahada. If they remain Hindu, they will be a part of the oppressor.
4. Eventually we should try to reach a significant portion of the population. Such that Hindu consolidation is unable to get political victories.
5. If that fails, we need to settle for West Bengal and the North east of India as a Muslim homeland for Indian Muslims. There can be separate Muslim nations created in Kerala, Hyderabad and elsewhere if locals there want.

The Indian Army needs to be defeated and the state authorities need to be tied down for this to happen. It may be necessary to highlight human rights abuses by Hindus as regularly as possible so that UN task forces sanction India. Eventually the economy decline will force a curtailment of the armed forces which may lead to a demoralisation.
Then we will be in a position to ask for independent republics or one amalgamated province of Muslims.

All views are welcome.

Asking Indian Muslims to pick up arms against the state. Check
Asking armed Muslims to defeat Indian army. Check
Calling for the dismemberment of the country. Check
Inciting Religious violence. Check.

This patriotic Muslim isn't even arrested. And yet people complain that Indian Muslims are 2nd class citizens.

If any non Muslim Indian made such inflammatory post (that too on a Pakistani website) he would be enduring torture in custody of security agency.

But I like Afrazul Mandal. He does not pretend to patriotic like other Indian Muslims. He is unapologetic about his views. His 'rare' honesty is to be cherished.

@padamchen @GHALIB