certifired_img

Books and Documents

Islam,Terrorism and Jihad (27 Nov 2015 NewAgeIslam.Com)



How Modi can destroy Wahabi extremists like ISIS

 

 

 

 

 

By Uday Mahurkar

16-11-2015

The multiple terror attacks in Paris have set alarm bells ringing in India's security establishment and the Prime Minister's Office (PMO); not without reason. Outside the Muslim countries, the Paris attacks are perhaps the deadliest in magnitude. France has witnessed the worst ever loss of lives after 9/11 and the subsequent al Qaeda attack on a train in Spain, which claimed close to 200 lives.

The Paris tragedy occurred hours after Prime Minister Narendra Modi praised the moderate Islamic stream of Sufism during his Wembley Stadium speech in London in what was a counter to Wahabism. It demonstrated both his courage and sense of timing. There is a great similarity between the Paris terror module and the 26/7 Ahmedabad attack by Indian Mujhahideen in which serial blasts claimed 59 lives in a matter of two hours.

But most importantly, this is the first big hit by the ISIS, the most deadly adherent of ultra-Wahabism (the term signifies those who support Islamic terror amongst the Wahabis) outside the Arab world. It is a fact that creates the fearsome prospect of a similar ISIS attack in India, which is already on the terror outfit's hit list. The only reassuring aspect for India is that, on the whole, ISIS has failed to influence the Indian Wahabi youth barring a few. The number of such youth would not be more than 200 (or even less), not many considering the fact that the percentage of Wahabis among the 13 crore-odd Sunnis of India is more than 40 per cent, the remaining 60 per cent being moderate Sufis who have not produced a single terrorist so far.

How prepared is the Narendra Modi government should India face a Paris-like attack? It might be prepared to tackle the immediate challenge, but it is yet to come out with a long-term strategy to promote Sufism and tackle the challenge of ultra-Wahabism.

Learning from Modi's Wembley address

For one Modi has shown a sound understanding of India's Muslim problem by constantly praising Sufism, as seen at the Wembley address. He virtually said that Sufism can save Islam from radicalism. For, praising Sufism, which Wahabis equate with Hindu tradition of Guru Puja and therefore un-Islamic, is to invite the enmity of ultra-Wahabis.

Significantly, however, Modi government's unstated policy of not prosecuting the radicalised-turned-moderate Wahabi youth, who have returned from ISIS, disgusted with its medieval-style vandalism, and helping them join the mainstream with the assistance of their parents is a good strategy that creates space for the moderate Wahabis. This reveals Modi has a good understanding of the developments in the Wahabi world at a time when the moderate Wahabi stream appears to be strengthening after attacks such as the 2014 Peshawar school blasts in which the even Wahabi children were killed by the ultra-Wahabi Tehreek-e-Taliban.

The warm welcome that Modi got on his recent tour of the Wahabi nations in the Middle-East - during which the Sheikh of Dubai even gave permission to the local Hindus to build a temple in what is a first in these Wahabi countries - was yet another signal of the strengthening of the moderates in the orthodox Wahabi stream of Islam.

Concrete policy to promote Sufism

Modi might be prepared for an ISIS assault strategically, but his government has not indicated as to how it will tackle the spread of Wahabism in the long run by promoting Sufism. In May 2014, Modi sent a chador to Ajmer Sharif in a gesture of appreciation for moderate Islam after meeting a delegation of Sufi leaders in Delhi.It was a welcome step, but mere gestures aren't going to work. His government needs to have a concrete strategy to encourage Sufism. While there is no dearth of moderate Wahabis, it is equally true that ultra-Wahabism signifying terror is born out of Wahabism.

Interestingly, during the Congress regime, Wahabism got a major fillip so that the number of Wahabis today stands close to 40 per cent, rising from 10 per cent at the time of independence. Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, India's first education minister, was himself a follower of Wahabi tenets and had even admitted that he disliked his father's leaning towards the syncretic tradition of Pir-Muradi (dargah worship). During the Congress rule, state Wakf boards were filled with Wahabis and they got stronger with inflow of huge funds from Saudi Arabia, the main promoter of Wahabism in the world.

The Sufis are perpetually starved of funds and therefore don't have money to establish modern schools and colleges and also mosques and madrasas of Sufi tradition and as Wahabis have done with money coming from the Middle East and through Zakat. Just as a government helps economically poor sections not coming under any reserved category, it can help the Sufis through a well-thought-out policy.

Modi has to keep the hotheads in Sangh Parivar

Incidents like Dadri and the senseless rhetoric of the fringe elements in the Sangh Parivar and even Union ministers like Mahesh Sharma and Sadhvi Niranjan Jyoti, who paint all Muslims with the same brush leave no place for moderate Muslims, both Sufis and moderate Wahabis, are like time bombs that aid the spread of ultra-Wahabism.

They provide grist to the designs of Ultra-Wahabi elements like Lashkar-e-Taiba, Taliban and the dreaded ISIS. The battering that Muslims got in the 2002 Gujarat riots was seen as some kind of victory by the fringe elements of Sangh Parivar; the episode did the most to promote ultra-Wahabism in the form of the rise of Indian Mujahideen, which organised a series of terror attacks in India between 2007 and 2009.

The entire plank of IM for attracting Muslim youth towards its terror strike was based on the footage of Muslims being killed and attacked during the 2002 riots. The injuries of Muslims were magnified many times over, thanks to the role of left-wing NGOs and a section of the media, and the photos and literature released by the Wahabi fanatics. With this material, they projected India as committing great atrocities on Muslims. So, it is imperative that those from the Sangh Parivar speak a language that tars all Muslims with the same brush are punished by the BJP and the RSS. The saving grace is the fact that the top RSS leadership today is in agreement with this and has not taken kindly to the divisive statements of Mahesh Sharma and others.

Re-reading history textbooks with Muslim figures

A lot of time has passed since the Modi government took over, but it is yet to introduce meaningful changes in history textbooks in schools to inculcate a sense of patriotism amongst Muslims. Many pan-Islamists continue to figure as nationalists in these books while the Muslims who sacrificed for India are missing - names such as Ibrahim Khan Gardi of the third Battle of Panipat, Hakim Khan Sur who fought alongside Rana Pratap, many Muslim generals who fought under Shivaji, and recent Paramvir Chakra holders like Brigadier Usman (who died fighting Pakistani insurgents in the 1948 skirmish) and Havaldar Hamid of 1965 Indo-Pak war fame.

There is also lot of scope to add to the list of liberal Muslim rulers, starting with Mughal emperor Akbar, and including in it rulers like Zainul Abidin of Kashmir (ruled 1420 to 1470), one of the greatest Muslim rulers of India, Sultan Ibrahim Adil Shah of Bijapur, Mughal emperor Shah Alam-II, who revived the liberal policies of Akbar after these had been discontinued by Aurangzeb and Wajid Ali Shah, the Nawab of Oudh. Such changes in history books will help develop a nationalist outlook amongst Muslim students, including those from Wahabi families.

I can't forget a story I did in 2000 on an Ahmedabad school run by a Hindu family where 90 per cent of the students were Muslims and would happily chant Saraswati Vandana. I examined the paintings drawn by the students to understand their mind. One of them drew my attention - a sixth standard student had drawn a church, a mosque and a temple on the banks of a river. I tried to know whether the student's parents were moderate Sufis or orthodox Wahabis.

To my surprise, I was told they were Wahabis. Clearly, nationalist history can bring change even in Muslims coming from orthodox streams if this is taught at the school level.

Modi will have to do more to find success in this sensitive and challenging task facing India.

Source: goo.gl/i9RAEr

URL: http://newageislam.com/islam,terrorism-and-jihad/uday-mahurkar/how-modi-can-destroy-wahabi-extremists-like-isis/d/105438

New Age Islam, Islam, Islamic Online, Islamic Website, Islam, Terrorism and Jihad, Muslim and Islamphobia, Islamphobia, Islam and Society, Radical Islamism and Jihad, #parisattack, Hyderabad, Telangana, Internet radicalisation, Radicals Hyderabadi engineering graduate




TOTAL COMMENTS:-   2


  • ISIS upholds, one day, they would conquer the world so as to ensure all the nations to practise Sharia law.

    The following is the extract from the website, nowtheendbegins.com/pages/radicalIDEOLOGY/sharia-law.htm, pertaining to polygamy:

    'A man has the right to have up to 4 wives and none of them have a right to divorce him -- even if he is polygamous.'

    (سورة النساء, An-Nisaa, Chapter #4, Verse #19)-Moshin Kahn translation:
    O you who believe! YOU ARE FORBIDDEN TO INHERIT WOMEN AGAINST THEIR WILL; and you should not treat them with harshness, that you may take away part of the Mahr you have given them, unless they commit open illegal sexual intercourse; and live with them honourably. If you dislike them, it may be that you dislike a thing and Allah brings through it a great deal of good.'

    The phrase, you are forbidden to inherit women against their will, as mentioned above could be interpreted as men are prohibited to inherit women against their will not to have them to be their husbands.  Or in other words, Quran allows women to divorce from their husbands if they are polygamous.

    Sharia law turns up to be biased against men that it permits men to divorce from women and yet disallows women to divorce from men.  Yet Quran permits women to divorce from men.  As there is a contradiction between Sharia law and Quran, it implies that Sharia law is man-made law instead of law from Allah.  As it is so, it is irrational for ISIS to insist the world to comply with Sharia law. 


    By zumamusa - 11/28/2015 4:59:11 AM



  • ISIS intends to conquer this world since they insist all countries to practise Sharia law instead of democracy.

    The following is a list of Sharia law from the website, http://www.billionbibles.org/sharia/sharia-law.html, against women with discrimination:

    "A man can unilaterally divorce his wife but a woman needs her husband's consent to divorce.

    Testimonies of four male witnesses are required to prove rape against a woman.

    A woman who has been raped cannot testify in court against her rapist(s).

    A woman's testimony in court, allowed only in property cases, carries half the weight of a man's.

    A female heir inherits half of what a male heir inherits.

    A woman cannot drive a car, as it leads to fitnah (upheaval).

    A woman cannot speak alone to a man who is not her husband or relative.

    A woman can have 1 husband, but a man can have up to 4 wives; Muhammad can have more.'

    (سورة الأحزاب, Al-Ahzaab, Chapter #33, Verse #58)-Mohsin Khan translation:
    'and THOSE WHO ANNOY BELIEVING men and WOMEN underdeservedly THEY BEAR (on themselves) THE CRIME OF SLANDER AND PLAIN SIN.'

    Sharia law has set law to discriminate women undeservedly.  The law could annoy these women undoubtedly.  Quran verse as mentioned above forbids this act.

    How could the above Sharia law annoy women?  Sharia law demands 1 woman to have 1 husband and yet 1 man could have more.  This would annoy a woman causes her to feel discrimination.  Besides, the same is for a woman to need her husband's consent to divorce and yet she could not do so.  Sharia law demands 4 male witnesses to prove rape against a woman.  A woman might annoy against this law since a man could rape quietly with her alone without verdict.  Sharia law disallows a woman who has been raped to testify in court against her rapist(s).  This law would annoy a woman not to testify a rapist if she is raped quietly without anybody around.  Besides, all the rest of the Sharia law would annoy women due to their discrimination.  As the phrase, those who annoy believing...women undeservedly, is mentioned above with the phrase, the crime of slander and plain sin, Quran condemns discrimination against women to cause them to be annoyed.

    Quran disallows Muslims to torture women.  The following is the extract:

    (سورة البروج, Al-Burooj, Chapter #85, Verse #10)-Moshin Kahn translation:
    Verily, THOSE WHO PUT INTO TRIAL THE BELIEVING men and believing WOMEN (BY TORTURING THEM and burning them), and then do not turn in repentance (to Allah), then they will have the torment of Hell, and they will have the punishment of the burning Fire. 

    As Quran disallows Muslims to torture women, do you think it would permit Sharia law to set discrimination against women to torture them to make them feel them they are second class people?  As Quran disallows Muslims to torture women, do you think it would permit to torture a woman not to speak out herself to be the witness when she is alone being raped by a man?  As Quran disallows Muslims to torture women, do you think it would permit to torture a woman not to own a car and men could have it?  Certainly!  Sharia law contradicts the words of Quran.

    Allah treat men and women equally.  This is shown in the following verse:
    (سورة الأحزاب, Al-Ahzaab, Chapter #33, Verse #35)-Mohsin Kahn translation:
    Verily, the Muslims (those who submit to allah in Islam) men and women, the believers men and women (who believe in Islamic Monotheism), the men and the women who are obedient (to allah), the men and women who are truthful (in their speech and deeds), the men and the women who are patient (in performing all the duties which allah has ordered and in abstaining from all that allah has forbidden), the men and the women who are humble (before their Lord - allah), the men and the women who give Sadaqat (i.e. Zakat, and alms), the men and the women who observe Saum (fast) (the obligatory fasting during the month of Ramadan, and the optional Nawafil fasting), the men and the women who guard their chastity (from illegal sexual acts) and the men and the women who remember allah much with their hearts and tongues allah has prepared for them forgiveness and a great reward (i.e. Paradise).'

    Quran permits women to have their option int their decision.  The following is the extract:

    (سورة الأحزاب, Al-Ahzaab, Chapter #33, Verse #36)-Mohsin Khan translation:
    It is not for a believer, man or woman, when ALLAH and His Messenger HAVE DECREED a matter that THEY SHOULD HAVE ANY OPTION IN THEIR DECISION. And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger, he has indeed strayed into a plain error.'

    As the phrase, they should have any option in their decision, is mentioned above, there is no reason to discriminate against women.

    As Sharia law contradicts the words of Quran, it proves that Sharia law is human-made law instead of the laws from Allah. 

    Nevertheless, there is no reason why ISIS to insist all nations to comply with Sharia law so as to conquering them.

    By zumamusa - 11/27/2015 7:30:28 PM



Compose Your Comments here:
Name
Email (Not to be published)
Comments
Fill the text
 
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in the articles and comments are the opinions of the authors and do not necessarily reflect that of NewAgeIslam.com.

Content