i suspect the tableeghi jamaat dogs in her murder... amu is in uttar pradesh and the deoband mullah college is in the same state though even without deoband many modern indian muslims in the last 20 years have become talibanized by internalizing and adapting the practices of non-muslims... the murderers might have been inspired by the first murder among the bloggers in bangladesh.
the result is these female students of amu...
these female students have gone against the great progress made by world leaders like nasser and muammar, and therefore should be forced to burn their burqas and "hijabs" and taught to be female.
@Color_Less_Sky this is what i was talking of, about many indian muslims having become talibanized, though as i wrote in the first paragraph, taliban derives its ideology from deoband, india.
@Jf Thunder
i give full support to indian military to raid and bombard the deoband mullah college and every tableeghi jamaat office in india... this will be a great service to islam and the ummah... if indian military must exist, it must be to cleanse indian society of reactionary filth.
Deobandi may be Orthodox but I find it highly objectionable that you use word like Taliban for them. Taliban is waging a war against their nation. Does Deobandi have any history of arms revolution? Deobandi school of thought is highly patriotic. They have supported Hindu-Muslim Unity, Opposed Partition and other things. I would say they are like RSS of Muslims.
Can you provide some links to support your reasons?
Many Indians do not know history of Deobandi. It can provide some information. BTW, I am not a Muslim. I have always read good things about Deoband.
Tehelka - India's Independent Weekly News Magazine
A Patriotic Tradition
The anti-terrorism stand of the Deobandi ulema is nothing new; it’s a reiteration of a nationalist tradition with deep historical roots, says YOGINDER SIKAND
Following the massive anti-terrorism convention organized by the Dar ul-Ulum Deoband two months ago, literally dozens of such public meetings have been held by Muslim groups, particularly those led by Deobandi ulema, across India. Ulema who have addressed these rallies have insisted that terrorism has no room in Islam, some of them going so far as to issue fatwas to that effect, and also calling for inter-communal harmony. Which is all, of course, to the good, considering the fact that many non-Muslims continue to labour under the impression that there is an inherent link between Islam, particularly the Deobandi expression of it, and terrorism.
The sudden spate of conventions stressing inter-community harmony and denouncing terrorism organized by the Indian ulema have received considerable media attention. However, these conventions have been reported about in the media in such a manner as to suggest that they represent a sudden change of heart, due perhaps to political pressure, on the part of the Indian Deobandi ulema, who have, for years, especially since the rise of the Taliban in Afghanistan, received a very bad press. It is also being argued in some sections of the media that the anti-terrorism and pro-communal harmony rhetoric of the Indian Deobandis is not really sincere and is simply a means to stave off criticism or state control and that they are secretly wedded to an aggressively 'anti-national', 'communal' and 'pan-Islamic' agenda.
This argument, is, however, deeply flawed, as a reading of the history of the Deobandi ulema will suggest. Keeping in mind this historical context, it appears that the current campaign for communal harmony and against terrorism led by the Indian Deobandi ulema is actually a reiteration of a tradition that has deep roots in Deobandi history, rather than being a new invention meant simply for public consumption.
The fact remains, although this, unfortunately, is strictly kept out of our history textbooks, that the majority of the Indian Deobandi ulema in pre-1947 India were strongly anti-imperialist, vehemently opposed communalism, championed Hindu-Muslim unity, and, while insisting on the protection of Muslim (and other minorities') rights, forcefully opposed the Partition of India. They stressed that there was no contradiction between being Muslim and Indian at the same time. Considerably before the Congress and the Muslim League began talking about full independence for India, leaders of the Deoband madrasa had already not just begun demanding it but also started taking practical measures for it. The then rector of the madrasa, Maulana Mahmud ul-Hasan, was imprisoned by the British in Malta for organizing an uprising that aimed at overthrowing British rule and replacing it by a government consisting of Hindus and Muslims.
Those who, ignorant, deliberately or otherwise, of the strongly patriotic traditions of the majority of the Indian Deobandi ulema, insist that the current campaign of the Indian Deobandis against terrorism and communalism is simply a pious ruse designed to conceal an 'anti-national' agenda, would do well to read a recently reprinted Urdu booklet, bearing the revealing title of 'Hamara Hindustan Aur Uske Fazail' ('Our India and Its Glories'), which brilliantly articulates this commitment of leading Deobandi ulema to the cause of composite Indian nationalism and inter-communal harmony.
One of the two essays in the booklet is penned by Maulana Husain Ahmad Madni, then rector of the Deoband madrasa and head of the Jamiat ul-Ulema-i Hind ('The Union of the Ulema of India'), a major Deobandi ulema organisation. The essay was first published sometime in the early 1940s, in response to the Muslim League's demand for a separate Muslim state and to counter the claim articulated by many 'upper' caste Hindu leaders that Indian nationalism was necessarily synonymous with 'Hindu nationalism', thus effectively excluding the Muslims from the Indian nationalist project..
The essay is based on the argument that India has a special, revered place in the Islamic tradition. Hence, it insists, the Muslims of the country should consider themselves particularly honoured to have been born in the country. Because India had been specially blessed by God, it argues, the Muslims must work for the welfare, including the unity of the country. Contrarily, to demand the partition of the country, it suggests, would be to defy the Divine Will itself. At the same time, using the motif of India being specially blessed by God, for which it draws upon resources within the larger Islamic tradition, it seeks to counter the assertion put forward so aggressively by 'upper' caste Hindu 'nationalists' of Islamic identity being necessarily contradictory to Indian nationalism.
Maulana Madni's essay, titled 'Hamara Hindustan' ('Our India'), draws upon narratives contained in the works of classical Islamic scholars to illustrate the 'glories' (fazail) of India.
He writes that Islamic tradition has it that God directed Adam, the first man and the first prophet, to be sent down to earth to India. It was thus from India that the human race sprang from Adam's progeny. This implies, Maulana Madni argues, that the Indian Muslims must consider India as their 'ancient home' (watan al-qadim). In addition, Maulana Madni refers to the Quran as mentioning that God has sent prophets to every nation, and Maulana Madni takes this to mean that prophets must have also been sent to India as well. This, he says, is further suggested by the fact the numerous Muslim saints (awliya-i allah) have 'discovered', through 'spiritual encounters' (ruhi mulaqat), the graves of various prophets in India. Since, as the Quran says, the religion (din) taught by all the prophets of God, including those who were possibly sent to India, was one and the same—al-Islam ('The Surrender'), it is obvious that from ancient (i.e. pre-Muhammadan) times onwards Islam has been present in India. In fact, Maulana Madni argues, 'it is an unchallengeable fact that from the very beginning India has been the land of Islam (islam ka watan)'.
India, Maulana Madni insists, is as much the motherland of the Muslims as it is of other communities in the country. In a rhetorical statement that might appear as somewhat quixotic, Maulana Madni went so far as to claim that Muslims do, or at least should, display an even greater concern for India's welfare than other communities because while many Hindus burn their dead and throw their ashes into rivers, and the Parsis let vultures feed on their dead, the Muslims bury their dead in the bosom of the earth, in the very soil of their motherland. In contrast to the Hindus and the Parsis of the country, the mortal remains of the Muslims remain in India in their graves and shall remain so till the Day of Judgment. The Hindus believe in reincarnation of the dead, and there is no guarantee that their dead would be reborn in India, while the Muslims believe they shall remain in their graves till the Day of Judgment. Hence, Maulana Madni argues, it is only the Muslims who remain faithful to India even after their death. This itself means, he writes, that Muslims are, or should be, more attached to India and concerned about its welfare than people of other communities.
No community can, therefore, claim a monopoly of Indian patriotism, Maulana Madni insists, challenging Hindu assertions to the contrary. Just as the Aryans, the Huns and the Greeks came to India and settled here and made this their home, he writes, so did the early Muslims. The only difference between the Muslims and the others is that the former arrived in India earlier. In fact, Maulana Madni argues, the Muslims, as a whole, can be more legitimately said to be the original inhabitants of India, since the vast majority of the Indian Muslims are descendants of converts from India's pre-Aryan aboriginal people. Hence, he asserts, it is completely misleading to claim that India is not the land of the Muslims or that it belongs to the Hindus alone. The welfare of all the communities of India, including the Muslims, depends on the overall welfare of the country, and this is yet another reason why the Indian Muslims must love and serve their country. Maulana Madni insists that the Muslims cannot not leave India and depart for any other country, nor would any other country accept them. The Indian Muslims would have to live and flourish in India itself.
While recognising that the Indian Muslims have a spiritual bond with Muslims elsewhere owing to adherence to a common religion, Maulana Madni argues that this does not come in the way of their patriotism. Nor are the Indian Muslims alone in sharing such spiritual ties with their co-religionists elsewhere. The Indian Hindus, Maulana Madni notes, are linked through a common religion with Hindu communities outside India, such as in South Africa, Mauritius and Fiji. If that does not lead to their patriotic credentials being questioned, he asks, why should the Indian Muslims' spiritual links with Muslims elsewhere be regarded as suspect?
As head of the Deoband madrasa and of the Jamiat ul-Ulema-i Hind, Maulana Madni enjoyed the support of the majority of the Deobandi ulema, and his legacy continues long after his death. As his essay so brilliantly asserts, he, like most of his fellow Deobandis, was consistently and ardently anti-imperialist and passionately committed to Hindu-Muslim harmony and unity and to the cause of India as a whole. This, one cannot help remarking, was in stark contrast to Hindu extremist forces, such as the RSS and the Mahasabha, who vehemently opposed Hindu-Muslim unity and also played into the hands of British imperialism.
The Deobandi ulema who are now raising their voices against terrorism and for communal harmony are thus not engaging in anything novel. This has been the tradition of majority of the Indian Deobandis right from the late nineteenth century, and they thus seem only to be reiterating this tradition. Such initiatives should be warmly welcomed. If the state and secular non-Muslim forces are genuinely concerned about terrorism and communal conflict, they must explore ways of creatively cooperating with these and other such ulema groups. But then, since terrorism and communal conflict are not issues specific to any community, it is also for non-Muslim, particularly Hindu, religious organisations, to take a cue from the Deobandis and launch similar mass awareness campaigns against all forms of terrorism, including those engaged in by Hindu groups which have unleashed untold violence in recent decades.
RIP.
At least let the report of autopsy come in before we start suspecting killing.
@GURU DUTT is right in saying that these days no attempt is sparred to malign India for what ever news. Those questioning the credentials, must learn more about AMU first, it is far more liberal and progressive institute that what media portrays it to be.
Rightly said! I think it is high time Govt or Media Bodies create guidelines.
I have not seen anything good in Indian Media for long time. May be last time Indian Media did something good was during Jessica Lal Murder.
In Deoband, thoughts of Modi - TOI Blogs
In Deoband, thoughts of Modi
April 10, 2014, 11:57 PM IST
Jyoti Malhotra in
IST | India |
At the Darul Uloom seminary in Deoband, Asia’s second-largest Islamic seminary after Al Azhar in Cairo, more than 4000 students from all over the country – as well as from Afghanistan and Bangladesh – study the scriptures and hope to become either qazis or go on to get themselves a secular education at universities like the Aligarh Muslim University (AMU). At Deoband itself, after a thorough grounding in the Koran and Hadith, both in Arabic and Urdu, students can take courses in English and Computers.
Many of the students are from West Bengal and Bengali graffiti is common – a fact that shouldn’t surprise you if you recall the creation of the All India Muslim League in Dacca in 1906 – although they are now so North Indian-ised that you can hear the accent only if you strain your ears.
They all have one thing in common : They are all supporters of Imran Masood, the Congress candidate from Saharanpur constituency, in which Deoband falls, and who shot into the limelight last week for his hate speech against Narendra Modi. (He was since arrested, released and voted in the polls today, April 10th.)
“Kya kaha tha Imran Masood ne”, what exactly did Imran Masood say, I asked a group of students in Darul Uloom last week. All of them are clad in trademark skullcap, white kurta and shalwar which rises a few inches above the ankles.
There is much laughter around. “Haan, kaha tha, ki agar Narendra Modi is taraf aate hain to hum unki boti-boti bana denge,” says Tasavvur, studying in the 7th class Arabic. Imran Masood said that if Narendra Modi comes to these parts then we will cut him up into small-small pieces.
And was it right of him to say so?
“Yeh to dehaat ki bhasha hai,” they laugh again. Everybody speaks like this in these parts. They point out that the Congress did not expel him from the party, even if Rahul Gandhi may have earlier disapproved of Imran’s language.
Clearly, with the Congress party expected to lose heavily in Uttar Pradesh, the chance of winning the seat in Saharanpur tempted the party to over-ride morality with political compulsion.
Arshad Madani, the head of the committee that runs Deoband and the chief of the Jamiat-Ulema-i- Hind, however admitted that it was “wrong of Imran to speak like that. He should not have done it.”
And yet, despite its all-male sensibility – there’s a separate seminary for girls — wandering around Darul-Uloom doesn’t in the least feel you’re living a Wahabi nightmare, unlike in Saudi Arabia, where women cannot walk on the streets without covering their heads. While Saudi Arabia is the worst offender, demanding that women be covered in all black, predominantly Shia Iran reduces the punishment somewhat by allowing the cover to be of any colour. In Afghanistan, the burquas are blue, but increasingly in Kabul the women and girls are shedding them in favour of a ‘chador’ covering their heads and shoulders – just as they do in large parts of India, again across religion.
Both Madani and the students I spoke to in Darul Uloom cringed at the question of the ultra-conservative “Wahabi” linkage often established between the Islamic schools practiced in Saudi Arabia and Deoband. In the West, especially these days, “Deoband” has somehow become a catch-all word for hardline Islamic thought and practice, as if it is another word for the ‘Taliban.’
“This is all propaganda,” Madani said, adding that he had often met the Saudi sultans and told them about Deoband’s essentially secular, but religious, character.
Remember that Indira Gandhi was the chief guest at Deoband during its centenary celebrations in 1966. You would need a special kind of Congress leader not only to remember that today, but
to emphasise the nationalist credentials of the Deobandis during the Partition years, for refusing to support Jinnah’s Muslim League.
Remember, too, that Deoband was set up in 1866 as a reaction to the British colonialists who had crushed the 1857 uprising in nearby Meerut and Kanpur and Lucknow and then, without mercy, evicted their beloved emperor, albeit a puppet, Bahadur Shah Zafar, and sent him across the black waters to Rangoon. No matter that the Mughals had been in decline for over a century.
Of course that other great reaction to the momentous events of 1857 was the setting up of the Aligarh Muslim University, or its predecessor Mohamedaan Oriental College, by Sir Syed Ahmad in 1877. Sir Syed saw that one of the causes of the 1857 uprising was the absence of real power in the hands of India’s Muslims, and he hoped MAO and later AMU would train generations of Muslim people so as to participate in the development of India.
Qamarudzaman, whose father teaches English at Darul Uloom shows me around the seminary. He says he is fed up of being unemployed, despite his English education and his training as an electrician. A beautiful brick gate built by the former Afghan king Zahir Shah holds pride of place. The rest of the old buildings have been demolished. A new library in marble is being built. I ask him if he is nervous that Narendra Modi is coming to power.
Qamarudzaman stops in his tracks, as if a little bewildered by the question, then squares his shoulders. “Not at all,” he answers, “hum is mulk ke baashinde hain, kirayedaar nahin.”
I am a citizen of this country, not a tenant, he says.
