Sickular Vs Bhakt: The 'intolerance' debate in India reveals our intellectual hollowness

The debate over 'intolerance' has led to a strong polarisation in India.

Either you are on one side or you are on the other side of the political divide, getting labelled as 'sickular' or 'bhakt'.

Positions have hardened to such an extent that people are just not willing to listen to the other side.

That's really sad for a country where people claim to have a continuous civilisation of thousands of years.

Centuries ago the great Kabir said, 'Nindak niyare rakhiye...'. 

It is always wise to have critics around, it is not and can never be an insult to any group or society to have critical opinions. 

In fact, it strengthens, makes you do introspection. But it is very very unfortunate when a certain section of people get into the state where they just tom-tom own greatness and refuse to listen to opposing views.

So, if I say, there is intolerance in India, I am a 'sickular' person

And if someone says, there is no intolerance, he is a 'bhakt'

There can be space 'in between' two, the space to converse, to talk. The truth is that there is intolerance, it was always there and will always remain so. 

Society and state remain intolerant towards the poor, the weak, those on the margins. 

And, if you believe, India is a country where rivers of milk and honey flow, you have a right to your opinion but you can't accused those with contrarian position of being 'anti-India' or running campaign to defame the country. 

The threats to send people to Pakistan, to lodge cases against them, to question their patriotism--it is all intolerance. It will not help you in anyway--neither your party, nor your ideology.

Role of media in 'intolerance debate'

Indian media has failed miserably in taking the issue to the masses. TV channels have failed to even present the true picture, let alone educate the masses.

The manner in which self-styled 'national' channels confuse 'right-wing jingoism' with nationalism and patriotism, is a sad aspect of today's media. Those who are guilty of delivering hate speeches are called again and again to studios and given 'space'. 

Either it's Amir Khan's statement or Rahul Gandhi's interaction with students, reports were one-sided and were just aimed at 'senationalism', even at the cost of airing false news. Clearly, there is no sense of propriety and responsibility.

The complete 'doha' is: 

Nindak niyare rakhiye aangan kuti chhabaaye

Bin sabun bin paani nirmal karat subhaye

[Translation: Keep the critic around you, he will clean your heart without water and soap].

1,050 Muslim clerics' fatwa against ISIS: Indian Muslims' religious leaders had taken stand, condemned ISIS much before Paris attacks

Though acts of self-styled Islamic State [or ISIS] have been termed un-Islamic and repeatedly condemned by majority of Muslims, the Paris attacks have once again brought focus on IS.

On social media, Muslims have been clearly saying that ISIS doesn't represent Islam, at all.

There is also a feeling that Muslims should come out and condemn, though the fact is that Muslims are not just condemning ISIS, but on ground too it is large number of Muslims who are fighting it.

Also, Muslims are also the biggest victims of ISIS' atrocities, not just in Syria, Iraq and adjoining countries but also because of the Islamophobia that is generated by these acts. But these aspects don't get as much publicity.

In fact, much before the recent terrorist attack in France, Indian Muslim clerics had taken the unprecedented step, and 1,050 Muslim clerics had issued a fatwa, collectively, against the ISIS and had termed its acts as un-Islamic.

These 1,050 Muslim clergymen include Muftis, Qazis, Imams, Maulanas and Religious scholars. They included Jama Masjid heads, representatives of leading Islamic seminaries, institutions, organisations, sajjada-nasheens and influential Sufi shrines.

They had jointly signed this fatwa against ISIS, its leader and its fighters. It was a huge fatwa that tackled the issue point wise and exhaustively. One wished that it had got the due attention, it deserved, across the world. 

The Ulama had said that ISIS was an enemy of Islam. It was sent to United Nations (UN) general secretary Ban Ki Moon. The document's text said that ISIS actions were inhuman, it was involved in mass killings and was absolutely against the basic tenets of Islam.

See links

*1,000 Muslim clerics sign fatwa against ISIS. Huffington post report
*Over 1,000 Muslim clerics issue biggest fatwa against ISIS. New Indian Express
*Indian Muslims fatwa against ISIS' fanaticism, religious extremism. Wall Street Journal
*US welcomes Indian clerics' fatwa against ISIS. Read
*Muslim leaders issue fatwa against ISIS. Read

*Video report about Indian Muslim clergy against ISIS. Report

[Also, see post on why Islamic clergy across the world should call ISIS' bluff and its claims about being Islamic, need to declare it outside the pale of Islam. READ]

Paris attacks: Islamic clergy must loudly denounce ISIS, clearly say that IS acts are outside the pale of Islam

Self-styled 'Islamic State' or ISIS has struck once again--killing nearly 140 persons in Paris.

The attacks have outraged the world. Muslims across the globe are are also angry.

ISIS is not just involved in terrorism, wanton killings and bloodshed but it is also defaming Islam and Muslims.

Most Muslims were clearly shocked at the terror attacks in France and condemned ISIS' acts. 

However, there were some tweets and Facebook status messages about how 'killings by ISIS in Beirut and Baghdad this week were not splashed in the media".

There were messages like how the cycle of violence has been going on--West intrudes in Middle East and forces regime changes and in process these countries are forced into civil war in which thousands are killed.

Also, about how extremist groups get help from Western countries. The conversation goes to 'oil'، the great game and even how, media gives disproportionate coverage to events in Paris or England, compared to Africa, Asia or Middle East.

1. ...a lot of it may be correct, but the harsh reality is that ISIS or ISIL or 'Islamic State' is involved in evil acts, genocide, mass killings and acts of terror. And, unfortunately, the 'i' in IS stands for 'Islamic'. We can't erase it.

2. Saying things like, 'When X doesn't condemn for act by Y, why should I do it?', are fine for sake of arguments. The reality is that a very wrong message is going to the world, especially, the ordinary people.

3. We may say that it has nothing to do with Islam and talk of who made it and what it does, but the fact is that it operates in Islamic regions, runs a state, claims to have a Caliphate, raises 'Islamic flag', claims to give punishments to people as per 'Sharia laws'.

4. ISIS claims to be Muslim and hence we must loudly say, that they are NOT. Some Muslims are in a habit of saying that particular countries in the West support(ed) these groups or go about propounding theories about Zionists leading them but the conspiracy theories are to delude themselves. There are definitely Muslims in extremist groups and they are all  hurting Islam terribly.

Even if you believe [like some more knowledgeable friends] that it was US attack on Iraq-Afghanistan which led to this cycle of violence and media doesn't show lakhs dead in these countries and it is 'biased media coverage', even then what are you doing it to tackle the situation, smartly, or show that Muslim world is the real sufferer? At least, do something worthwhile to change the image. If innocents are killed at one place, it doesn't mean innocents can be killed elsewhere as revenge. There is no justification to killing in our faith. It is terrorism, which is against Islamic teachings. So why not a collective fatwa against ISIS! 

5. Either it is the ISIS than can erase this 'i' in their name, else, the Islamic world must strongly denounce this organisation. Muslim clergy must unitedly condemn and clearly say that ISIS is un-Islamic and its acts make it outside the pale of Islam.

6. The clerics of Saudi Arabia and Islamic countries must say it loud and clear. It should be said strongly, so that there is no doubt left in the minds of anyone and those who are its supporters on the ground, should realise that it is not Islamic and is an organisation contrary to teachings of our religion and a group which is destroying Islamic societies and defaming the faith.

7. When terror attacks were going on in India on a regular basis, Indian Muslim clerics strongly issued 'fatwas', hired an entire train and held huge public conferences to declare that 'Terrorism is un-Islamic'.

8. Indian Muslims had even refused to give place to Ajmal Amir Kasab for burial in any graveyard in Mumbai. It is an age of mass media and the message needs to be sent across. Saying it in mosques is not sufficient, you must inform non-Muslims too that ISIS doesn't represent us.

9. Fortunately, India, despite a huge Muslim population, has seen less radicalisation and the country has come out of the phase. Such incidents are now history.

10. ISIS, Al Qaeda and other such groups have done incalculable harm to Muslims. Time for Muslim clerics the world over to stand up, take a very strong stand, and issue a 'fatwa' unitedly, declaring ISIS as a bunch of criminals, terrorists and imposters, who are NOT MUSLIMS.

Down with you ISIS. 

Why BJP doesn't like Tipu Sultan, the king who fought British and whom they feared?

Shams Ur Rehman Alavi

The BJP's bigotry is well-known as far as Tipu Sultan is concerned. They don't like Tipu and there are reasons.


But first go back to history, which is very clear. Tipu Sultan fought British and they feared him, this can't be erased from history.


Not just Tipu, his father Hyder Ali had also fought Britishers and defeated them. But, even Hyder Ali, is not liked.


The reasons don't need to be explained. There were no other figures in contemporary India, then, who dared fight British.


Tipu defeated British and later got martyred in the last Anglo-Mysore war. There are records of communication between Tipu, his persistent efforts to forge unity among Marathas and Nizams, to establish a joint front against the British.


Both Marathas and Nizams ditched him. He wrote to Napoleon, he befriended French, did everything possible to evict British. But these aspects have no value for those who simply hate Tipu.


Yet, in case of Tipu Sultan, the right-wing 'dig out' out entire history, make an effort to find anything negative just to abuse, even spread falsehoods, to term him and declare him 'anti-Hindu'.


Fine, sometime do remember, Shivaji's attacks within the country, plunder of Surat, too. Do talk of other historical figures too who sided with British or your interest in history is limited to targeting a man whom you don't want to accept as a hero.

Firstly, Rulers were monarchs and there would be negative aspects to everyone. In modern era, in democracies, leaders can commit genocide, yet be 'nationalist' and 'patriot'. And their followers have the cheek to term Tipu Sultan as 'bigot and committing atrocities'.

The point is that Tipu, a Muslim, as first man who rose against British power in India, can't be accepted by Hindutva brigade.

So, even if he had a ring with 'Rama' written on it, or his excellent relations with Sringeri Sankaracharya, lone king of era who didn't compromise with British, and laid his life in the battle--nothing can make him a 'hero' in the eyes of BJP and Sangh Parivar.

The 'patriotism' or 'nationalism' certificate is issued by those who are the cheerleaders for the politician who can organise genocide in modern era, in democracies. They have the right to say who is nationalistic and who is 'anti-national'.

They can run mis-information campaigns. But the irony for them is that history can't be changed. BJP can't find a 'hero' from 18th century who dared to stand up against East India Company, as there was none other than Tipu Sultan.

Great Freedom Fighters of India: TIPU SULTAN

Tipu Sultan was undoubtedly among the greatest freedom fighters of the country. Senior journalist Dilip C Mandal writes, "The British made a list of the most formidable enemy commanders and it included the names of Napoleon and Tipu Sultan..."

"When Tipu was fighting British, the other native kings had already signed treaties with British. They included kings of Tanjore, Travancore and Peshwa. In the third Anglo-Mysore war, the Marathas and Nizams fought along side British, to form an joint alliance to defeat Tipu".

"This was not at all a Hindu-Muslim issue. It is unfortunate that such a glorious heritage--the contribution of Tipu Sultan, is being termed controversial due to foolishness of a section here", Mandal further writes.

LINK: Britain's National Army Museum: List of greatest foes of Britain

MUST-READ: Justice Katju's article on Tipu Sultan, how he was defamed to drive wedge between Hindus and Muslims. READ

William Dalrymple's article on how Tipu Sultan was targeted, defamed by British historians. READ

Six best cartoons on BJP's defeat and grand alliance's victory in Bihar: Cartoonists' response to election result

While millions of words have been written on the electoral outcome of the Bihar Assembly poll and the analyses continue, the cartoonists and artists have said it with a few strokes of their pens and brushes.

See these five cartoons that describe the BJP's loss and Nitish Kumar-Lalu Yadav's JDU-RJD-Congress alliance's victory. Clearly, 'Cow and Pakistan' are part of every illustration as BJP had made them a poll issue.

Surendra's cartoon touches the topic of reservation too. Others are by Manjul, Satish Acharya, Shreyas Nevare. The penultimate cartoon was published in Punjab Kesri. All these cartoons are about the results, except the last, which was about the exit polls.