My comments posted on Times of India article: Ditch the colonial dogma by Ehteshan Khan:
two hundred years' amu movement could not compete with deoband movement's priority to secure and consolidate islam in Muslim lives. it shunned any preparation for democratic power grab depending on the congress farce of secularism. with the coming of rss in power, however temporary, and its direct interference in Muslim religion, the deoband movement will be forced to fight another freedom struggle like the ulama did against christian British the first time. the struggle will be hard and at times as bloody as the first time. unless rss modifies its priorities.
Ditch the colonial dogma: AMU must honour the Sir Syed legacy by spearheading reform in Muslim personal laws
Today will be celebrated as Sir Syed Day by Aligarians across the world, to mark the 199th birth anniversary of a revolutionary man. It is important to introspect how far we have fulfilled his vision. He stood for modern education, scientific temper and reinterpreting Quran in light of modern knowledge.
For Sir Syed, the trauma of Indian Muslims after the failed 1857 uprising against the British called for education and social reforms among Muslims in India. He drew upon Islam’s rationalist tradition, and advocated a radical reinterpretation of Quran to make it compatible with post-Renaissance western humanistic and scientific ideas, and also to wean the ‘truth’ from fossilised dogma.
Aligarh Muslim University stands testimony to Sir Syed’s quest for reforms in education. It has been the fulcrum of education amongst Muslims in the subcontinent. AMU as an educational institution not only weathered the storms of Partition but also progressed from strength to strength. However, the vision of Sir Syed went beyond an institution to impart education to one which would spearhead social reforms amongst Muslims in the subcontinent. Unfortunately, AMU has been inefficacious in this role of being the incubator of social reforms.
Though the university boasts of a theology department, it functions more as a centre for management of religious life in the campus than for reformation of Islamic jurisprudence in the country. Consequently, Muslim personal laws in India are amongst the most conservative in the world.
Interestingly, many of the laws that Muslims in India are so sensitive about are actually a result of the conservative interpretations by colonial British judges. The Britishers during the period 1820-57 were at the forefront of reformation of many religious practices in the subcontinent. This included the abolition of sati and support to widow remarriages. However, this interference in religious practices was perceived to be a major reason for the revolt of 1857. As a result, post 1857, the Britishers were wary of taking up cudgels for social reforms and compromising their own position, and subsequently they sided with the conservative and orthodox sections of Indian society.
This led to a very orthodox codification of Muslim personal laws. The judgment of the Bombay high court in the case of Tajbi Abalal Desai vs Mowla Ali Khan Desai (1917) by the B Scott and Beaman bench is a quintessential case in point, as it laid the foundation for a conservative polygamy law. Orthodox codification is also exemplified in the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act of 1937.
Post-Independence, the personal laws of other religions were amended and reformed in the face of the stiff resistance from conservative sections of society. However, successive governments thought it best not to intervene in the domain of Muslim personal laws and left their interpretations in the hands of the Muslim Personal Law Board.
This has led to a situation where Muslim personal laws in many of the perceived conservative Muslim countries, including Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Pakistan and Iraq, were reformed and many practices including triple talaq and polygamy were either banned or restricted; but in India these practices and the Muslim personal laws still reflect the colonial orthodox interpretation.
With successive governments keeping a safe distance from getting involved in the reformation of Muslim personal laws, under normal circumstances the onus would lie on the liberal intelligentsia. However, post-Partition such a Muslim intelligentsia was non-existent in India, as the elite among the Muslims had migrated to Pakistan. The absence of such a pressure group further contributed to the lack of a voice for social reforms among Muslims.
In this scenario, AMU had a very crucial role to play. However, AMU, grappling with its own existential questions and identity crisis could not provide the role Sir Syed Ahmed Khan had envisaged for it and ceded space to the Deoband and other more orthodox centres in the country.
Recently, issues related to polygamy have been contested in the Supreme Court and the government has contended that the validity of triple talaq and polygamy has to be seen in light of gender justice, equality and dignity of women. It is a great opportunity for Muslims in India to reimagine and reinterpret their personal laws to correctly reflect the teachings of Quran and not the blinkered interpretation of some colonial British judge. Sir Syed had stood for such a reinterpretation in the 19th century but we have failed to achieve it in two centuries.
AMU needs to step up and play a very important role, not just by providing the correct interpretations of Quran but more importantly by being the harbinger of a Muslim social revolution. The university has immense goodwill among the Muslim community in the country and by being the voice of change it can convince the Muslims of the country to embrace this reformation. The chances of Muslims consenting to any change in personal laws are much higher if AMU spearheads it.
Two centuries is a very long time. Sir Syed must be turning in his grave (located in the AMU campus itself) that what he stood for is still only being read as the ‘Aligarh Movement’. If we are able to reform the laws related to triple talaq and polygamy and bring them in consonance with the laws in liberal Muslim countries before next year’s bicentennial celebrations of Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, it will be the greatest tribute to the man.
The writer is an IRS officer and AMU alumnus. Views are personal
DISCLAIMER : Views expressed above are the author's own.
---
very comprehensive and enlightening article.
two hundred years' amu movement could not compete with deoband movement's priority to secure and consolidate islam in muslim lives. it shunned any preparation for democratic power grab depending on the congress farce of secularism. with the coming of rss in power, however temporary and its direct interferences in muslim religion, the deoband movement will be forced to fight another freedom struggle like the ulama did against christian british the first time. the struggle will be hard and at times as bloody as the first time. unless rss modifies its priorities.
very enlightening article,indeed a ray of hope that reforms will be given the much needed legitimacy from the amu brass,and shall be widely acceptable to common people in india.just remember the tough resistance from the conservative forces which was faced by the likes of raja rammohun roy,and yet they continued in their endeavour. it is a fact that religious etiquette and rituals have to be in sync with the contemporary times and values of liberty equality and fraternity,which includes gender justice as we;; kudos to ehtesham
excellent beginnings by an amu scholar. let the entire community follow this.
in the southern states, muslim jehaadists have escalated their violence to sheer brutality and have gone on a mad stabbing and hacking spree. they have now assassinated many hindu leaders and yet the southern hindus do not retaliate. had this kind of violence been orchestrated with the hindus of harayana... these jehaadists would have become mincemeat. and hence these animals do not raise their ugly heads in these places.
why only amu, entire muslim community is requested to consider triple talaq is humiliating , discarding muslim women. islam do not permit killings of innocent persons, then why such ati human activities are being allowed ?
point correctly made. amu and similar institutions must lead from front. educational institutes have sphearheaded many such movements and changes in past and it is rightly the turn and chance of amu. instead of worrying about minority status, it should rise up and do pathbreaking work for muslim community.
it is true that many educated and affluent muslims migrated to pakistan but, in the intervening period, a solid middle class has emerged. it could be at the forefront of reform movements within the community. there should be no feeling that something is being imposed externally. the status of amu and the special place it occupies in the affections of the community could also be cherished.
No comments:
Post a Comment