Hindu Vivek Kendra
A RESOURCE CENTER FOR THE PROMOTION OF HINDUTVA
   
 
 
«« Back
How liberal Muslims make way for clergy

How liberal Muslims make way for clergy

Author: Sunnah Fitratullah
Publication: The Daily Pioneer
Date: April 3, 2002

When the Shankaracharya of Kanchi, offered a formula for resolving the Ayodhya tangle, all were anxious to know the decision of Muslim organisations. However, even when the formula was not yet formally proposed, discordant voices from Muslim political elites could be heard questioning the authority of All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) as a party to the dispute.

The Imam of the Jama Masjid was quick to announce the needlessness of any formula at that stage and that Muslims would abide by the court verdict. GM Banatwala of the Indian Union Muslim League was also opposed to any settlement with the VHP. Syed Shahabuddin, convener of Babri Masjid Coordination Committee, was strongly in favour of court verdict, too, saying that it was a matter between the Government and the VHP and it was "the Government's responsibility to maintain law and order and follow the order."

Amidst all these differing voices, Babri Masjid Committee, a body under the AIMPLB, was grappling to carve out a role for itself as the main negotiator, hoping for settlement "either by negotiation or a court verdict." However, even as the talks were going on, AIMPLB leadership became skeptical of the outcome.

Meanwhile, on March 13, when the three-judge bench of the Supreme Court in its interim judgement, prohibited symbolic bhoomi puja even at the acquired land, the Muslim Personal Law Board was issued notice making it a party to the litigation before the larger bench.

Ironically, the Court forgot that it was the same Muslim Personal Law Board which, in the mid- 1980s, along with many fanatic religious outfits, had rejected the Court's verdict in the Shah Bano maintenance case. Oddly, this time the Board has chosen to abide by the Court injunction. While everybody remembers that Muslims had refused to accept Court's verdict, the role of Muslim Personal Law Board as ring-master is hardly a part of public memory. The Board set precedence and now it is not surprising that the VHP is demanding construction of Ram Temple at Ayodhya through legislation, fearing that Court's verdict might go in favour of the opposite party.

Besides this, the whole episode raises many questions about the sincerity of the Muslim leadership. Shah Bano case had brought the little-known Personal Law Board in the limelight, turning its leaders into media stars. However, when the controversial Shah Bano case was settled in favour of fundamentalists, AIMPLB leadership lost the opportunity of hitting headlines every now and then. Hence, they found another opportunity in being a party to another controversial issue. Its leaders lost no time in setting up a Babri Masjid Committee under their patronage when differences between the Babri Masjid Action Committee and Babri Masjid Coordination Committee could not be resolved in the aftermath of Babri Masjid demolition - a lucrative issue to gain political edge. Apparently, the Board has simply refused to learn from its past errors.

It must be remembered here that it was after stooping to the demands of Muslim Personal Law Board that Rajiv Gandhi's government enacted law reversing the Court's verdict; but at the same time he was advised to harness the anger of Hindus by opening the doors of the Masjid to the devotees for worship of the idols of Ram Lalla. The decision proved most crucial in the history of Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi dispute.

Thus one comes to the conclusion that the political leadership of Indian Muslims has failed to show up because once in Parliament they keep quiet even on common issues of education, social and economic backwardness and employment among Muslims for fear of being branded "communal". They always look towards their non-Muslim secular friends to speak on their behalf - no wonder the clergy comes forward to fill in the void. This space provided to the clergy becomes total for common Muslims because the clergy always tends to legitimise its own pivotal role by inciting most emotive issues of religion, and that too pitching it against an unseen enemy. Clergy or the traditional leadership on the other hand, engages itself in doing the most bizarre things - the former Imam of Jama Masjid, Abdullah Bukhari, is its fine specimen.

Ironically, these imams have not changed a bit. What is worse is that they are projected by the establishment as the "leaders" of the Muslims as they are the most suitable choice in furthering their interests. The media too has not been any better.

Therefore, the question of leadership will remain unsolved till the leaders resolve to get rid of their fears of being branded as communal for addressing the problems of their own community. We must not forget that in the past common Muslims have thwarted the aspirations of politicians playing the card of fundamentalism and communalism. They have, for instance, refused to be part of Adam Sena of Muslims - a replica of the Shiv Sena or Bajrang Dal - thus averting a dangerous bifurcation of society along communal lines. The time to realise the role of these leaders has come. They must be denounced by every sensible Muslim before it's too late.
 


Back                          Top

«« Back
 
 
 
  Search Articles
 
  Special Annoucements