What Are The Key Legal Issues In The AMU Minority Status Case?

By Aftab Alam, New Age Islam 05 November, 2024 The Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) has been at the epicentre of the legal and political discourse ever since 1968, when the Supreme Court (SC) in Azeez Basha vs Union of India (1968) stripped it of its minority status. This week, a seven-judge constitution bench headed by the Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, and comprising justices Sanjiv Khanna, Surya Kant, J.B. Pardiwala, Dipankar Datta, Manoj Misra and Satish Chandra Sharma, is likely to deliver its verdict on AMU’s minority status. This judgment was reserved on Feb 1, 2024, after eight days of intense hearings. The genesis of the present case lies in a writ petition filed before the Allahabad High Court Dr. Naresh Agarwal v Union of India (2005) challenging the decision of the university to introduce a policy of reserving 50 percent of seats in the postgraduate medical courses for Muslim candidates in the light of the SC’s verdict in St. Stephen's College vs. University of Delhi (1991) case and after receiving approval from the Government of India (GOI). Firstly, on October 4, 2005, a single judge of the HC held that Azeez Basha continues to be good law and that AMU was not a minority institution entitled to protection under Article 30(1) of the constitution. Later, a division bench of the HC dismissed the appeal filed by the university and struck down Sections 2(L) and 5.2.C of the AMU Act which were introduced through the 1981 Amendment Act to reaffirm and restore AMU’s minority status. This decision of the HC surprised the university, jurists, and the Muslim community alike as they believed that Aziz Basha had become infructuous after the 1981 amendment to the AMU Act. Later, a batch of eight civil appeals, including those by the Union of India (UOI) and the AMU, were filed challenging the judgment of the Allahabad HC. On 24 April 2006, a Division Bench of the SC comprising Justices K.G. Balakrishnan and D.K. Jain put a stay on all other matters regarding appellant institution when AMU declared that it would not implement Muslim reservation in admissions. The bench further said that since the question raised in these appeals is of general importance, it is desirable that the matter be considered by a larger bench. Subsequently, on February 12, 2019, a 3-judge bench comprising Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justices L. Nageswara Rao and Sanjiv Khanna referred the AMU matter to a seven-judge bench for its consideration, framing two basic questions in the reference order for an authoritative pronouncement. Firstly, whether the Azeez Basha was correctly decided and whether it suffers from internal contradiction and reasoning on facts and on law, and secondly, what are indicia for determining an educational institution as minority institution to qualify for protection under Article 30(1) – an issue that was framed by the eleven Judge Bench in the TMA Pai Foundation vs State of Karnataka, (2002) but was left to be answered by any subsequent regular bench of the SC. Another issue that needed consideration was whether the 1981 AMU Amendment Act changed the basis of Azeez Basha and rendered it nugatory, an argument which was not entertained by the Allahabad HC. Subsequently, on October 12, 2023, the CJI constituted a seven-judge bench to hear the matter. It must be noted that the correctness of the SC judgment in the Azeez Basha was already doubted by historians, political commentators, and jurists. H. M. Seervai, an eminent constitutional law expert, declared it “clearly wrong and productive of grave public mischief” and pleaded for its overruling. Professor S.P. Sathe, called for reconsideration of Basha because “if incorporation of a university is the sole test of its establishment, no private university can ever be started in India.” Similarly, Prof. Tara Chand, a noted historian, stated that “It will be a falsification of the history of India if it is asserted from any quarter that the AMU was not established by the Muslims, and primarily for the educational advancement of the Muslims of India.” The SC in Anjuman-e-Rahmaniya vs District Inspector of Schools (1981) also questioned the correctness of Azeez Basha and referred it for reconsideration by a seven Judge Constitution Bench. It is a matter of fact that the Union of India (UOI), represented through successive governments since 1981, recognized and maintained the minority character of AMU. In its affidavit filed before the HC in 2005 and SC in 2006, the Union of India effectively contended that Azeez Basha was wrongly decided. The UOI also submitted that the 1981 amendment to the AMU Act was brought as a ‘corrective statute’, to reaffirm and restore AMU’s minority status. However, in 2016, the BJP-led NDA Government sought to withdraw the appeal filed by the UOI against the decision of the Allahabad HC in 2006. The SC, however, never decided during hearings whether the UOI can withdraw the appeal or not due to non-adherence to the procedure laid down by the court for withdrawal of appeals under ORDER XIX, Rule 26 of the SC Rules. In this regard it is also important to recall that the SC in State of Haryana v. State of Punjab (2002) held that “the decisions taken at the governmental level should not be so easily nullified by a change of Government and by some other political party assuming power, particularly when such a decision affects some other state and the interest of the nation as a whole. The SC further held that the succeeding government must be held duty-bound to continue and carry on the unfinished job rather than putting a stop to the same. Interestingly, the precursor to the BJP, the Jana Sangh, which was part of the merged Janata Party, had advocated for the restoration of AMU's minority character. The Janata Govt in May 1977 even introduced in the Lok Sabha an AMU (Amendment) Bill to restore its minority character, but it could not be enacted due to the early dissolution of the Lok Sabha, owing to internal squabbling. The BJP stalwarts such as LK Advani and Atal Behari Vajpayee were part of the Morarji Desai cabinet that had introduced the bill. Subsequently, after a prolonged struggle by the Muslims of India, the AMU Act 1920 was amended in 1981, restoring AMU’s minority status. The UOI and others opposing the petition for almost three days mostly argued on how AMU surrendered its minority status after the 1920 legislation and how the British government had the sole authority on its administration. The Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued that the promoters of AMU were loyal to the British government, and chose to surrender their rights, while many other institutions like Jamia Millia Islamia (JMI) chose not to cooperate with the British Government, and unlike AMU, have a minority status today. The CJI, however, countered that siding with a government or being a “loyalist” does not necessarily mean that AMU denounced its minority status. He pointed out that being against the government is not a prerequisite for being a minority institution. Tushar Mehta argued that, in contrast to the claim of petitioners that AMU was established with funding, money, and property owned by MAO College, several donors, including Hindu Maharajas, contributed to the funding of MAO College in Aligarh. He further stated that the land on which the college was built was donated by Lieutenant Governor Sir John Strachey. Mehta also argued that AMU is fully funded by the Union government. Earlier, the British government used to allocate 30 lakh rupees every year, and now the Union government allocates rupees 1,500 crores for AMU. Yet another respondent argued that the university has expanded from the previous 74 acres to 1150 acres of land with multi storied buildings, all because of the Union government’s aid. It was further argued that it would be a “public mischief” to overrule Azeez Basha, which would take away the Union’s control over the university. The respondents also argued that AMU was never administered by the Muslims as, under Section 13 of the AMU Act 1920, the government had complete control over the administration of the university through the Lord Rector who had power to give orders to the authorities of AMU, namely, the Court (supreme governing body), Executive Council, and the Academic Council. Tushar Mehta argued that the administrative team running the day-to-day operations was answerable to Lord Rector. This was countered by Justice Khanna stating that the Lord Rector was only “symbolic in-charge”. When the CJI pointed out those provisions could be tested as permissible regulatory measures under Article 30, Mehta refuted it on the grounds that there was no concept of a minority institution at the time when the AMU Act was legislated. Mehta further stated that there was never a mandate for the university to be run by Muslims and most of the people in the administration just happened to be Muslims as the law never required it to be so. The argument that the administration of AMU was “not vested in the Muslim minority” under the 1920 Act defies the fact that the Muslim community had de jure and de facto control over the management of AMU as its supreme governing body, the AMU Court comprises only Muslims. The Court had not only power to appoint all important functionaries, i.e. Chancellor, Pro-Chancellor, and Vice-Chancellor but also had powers to frame Statutes and to review the Annual Report of the university. The power vested in the Lord Rector was merely supervisory in nature and never meant to manage the day to day administration of the university. It must be further underlined that the presence of a few non-minority members in the governing body of a minority educational institution does not take away the controlling power of the said institution with respect its management till minorities have a preponderating voice. If we look at the composition of the AMU Court, the supreme governing body of the university, includes, beside others, representatives of Muslim culture and learning, Muslim Colleges of Oriental learning, Chairmen of Wakf Boards, Muslim Educational and Cultural Societies and All India Muslim Educational Conference etc. even after the 1951 Amendment that dropped the clause providing for exclusive Muslim membership of the Court, indicate preponderance of Muslims in it and therefore hardly undermines its minority character. Justice Krishna Iyer in Gandhi Faiz-e-Am College (1975) rightly held the presence of some non-minority members in the governing body of a minority educational institution is reasonable and promotive of the excellence in the administration and does not undermine the minority character of the institution. The respondents also failed to appreciate the distinction between regulatory measures and the administration of an educational institution. The SC has already fairly settled in the Kerala Education Bill (1958) that the right to administer does not include the right to mal-administer. In Mother Provincial (1970), the SC stated that minority institutions cannot be allowed to fall below the standards and excellence expected of educational institutions or, under the guise of exclusive right of management, to decline to follow the general pattern. The state may legitimately prescribe reasonable restrictions to ensure the excellence and prevent mismanagement and are intended to make minority educational institutions an “effective vehicle of education for the minority community,” provided they are not “destructive or annihilative of the character of the institution established by the minority” as stated by the SC in Sidhajbhai Sabhai (1963) case. Sir Syed, while framing the rules of the MAO College himself, emphasised the importance of a general supervision by the government over all the important matters so that no harm is caused to the college due to mismanagement or improper working of the trustees. External supervision by the government over the management of any educational institution cannot be equated with the surrender. Under Rule 38 of the MAO College, the Director of Public Instruction of the North West Province and Oudh was appointed as an ex-officio Visitor of the College, who had power of supervision and of making a report to the Government. Under Rule 144 stipulated that the Government shall have power “at any time and in any way to call for and examine the accounts of the college”. Similarly Rule 145 provided that “the Government shall have power to institute any enquiry with a view to ascertaining whether the provisions of the laws of the College for the time being in force are duly complied with, and if not, to compel the Trustees to comply with them.” The Azeez Basha wrongly held that AMU was not a minority institution because it came into being by the Central Legislature and not by the Muslim minority. It was neither in 1920 nor even today, can anyone establish a university without a statute. The Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Naresh Agarwal (2005) even acknowledged this fact and stated that a university cannot be set up without the intervention of the government. If Azeez Basha is held to be a good law, it would have large implications for the educational rights guaranteed to religious and linguistic minorities under Article 30(1) of the Constitution. The minorities would never be able to establish a university as a university can only be established by an act of the central or state legislature and, effectively, all the existing universities established by them would lose their minority status. The respondents have erroneously argued that the judgment of the bench would not have a “trickledown effect” on any other institution, statute or judgment as the Azeez Basha cannot be claimed to be sui generis, fact-specific judgment pertaining to AMU. The formal incorporation of an institution through a statute or recognition under a regulatory scheme should not be considered indicative of whether an institution qualifies as a minority educational institution. Another argument of the respondent was that AMU cannot have minority status because Entry 63 of the Union List in the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution declares AMU along with BHU as an institution of national importance, providing a safeguard for its status. If AMU is acknowledged as a minority institution, it would impede the powers vested in Parliament under Entry 63. It was argued that recognising the AMU as a minority institution would not only upset the equitable balance of Parliament’s authority over the two institutions, but also would undermine the authority of the Parliament and “rob” its powers vested under Entry 63. The Bench, however, clarified that the effect of Entry 63 is to place AMU and BHU under the exclusive legislative jurisdiction of the Parliament, designating them as institutions of national importance. It was further asserted that conferring minority status upon the university could potentially exempt it from the constitutional obligations of the Scheduled Caste (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), and Socially and Economically Backward Classes (SEBC) reservations. R. Venkataramani, the Attorney-General of India, contended that the unfettered right under Article 30 does not absolve them from having to abide by other “constitutional demands and requirements” regarding reservations. Mehta argued that a university of national importance such as AMU must have students from a diverse “spectrum” of backgrounds, and granting minority status would only allow higher representation of one community and would make deserving SC/ST/SEBC candidates lose their chance of studying in such a prestigious institute. It was also argued that the bench would have to choose between extending reservations to Muslim minorities or the SC/ST/SEBC community, as recognising the minority status of AMU would be at the expense of reservation rights for these communities. It must, however, be pointed out that Articles 15(5) and 15(6) of the constitution exempt minority educational institutions from granting reservations to other disadvantaged groups. Furthermore, several parliamentary legislations such as Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, Central Educational Institutions (Reservation in Admission) Act, 2006, and Central Educational Institutions (Reservation in Teachers Cadre) Act, 2019, have also excluded minority institutions from the implementation of national reservation policy. Furthermore, besides minority institutions, the Institutions of Excellence such as Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai and its constituent units, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Mumbai.North-Eastern Indira Gandhi Regional Institute of Health and Medical Science, Shillong, National Brain Research Centre, Manesar, Gurgaon, Jawaharlal Nehru Centre for Advanced Scientific Research, Bangalore, Physical Research Laboratory, Ahmedabad, Space Physics Laboratory, Thiruvananthapuram, and Indian Institute of Remote Sensing, Dehradun are also exempted from the implementation of reservation in admissions. During the course of hearing, the CJI asked whether the bench should also consider the validity of the 1981 amendment which changed the definition of “university” under the Act to say, a university established by the “Muslims of India.” However, the petitioners expressed their desire to avoid this line of argument, at least at this stage arguing that if Azeez Basha was struck down then the 1981 amendment would become redundant, and if it is upheld then a smaller bench of this court could consider it. Mehta wanted the 1981 amendment to be considered to avoid duplicity of hearings, which he said the petitioners were trying to do as they would get a “second chance” to argue about the minority status by relying on the 1981 amendment. Justice Khanna wanted to limit the scope of the hearing to the correctness of Azeez Basha as it would get the job done. Representing one of the respondents, advocate Rakesh Dwivedi raised the question of defining the term minority as, in his opinion, it has remained undecided in 75 years of the Constitution. He asserted that the community claiming minority status must numerically be fewer than the majority and still, if the said community belongs to the ruling group, then it would not qualify as a minority. He went on to even argue that during British rule, though Christians were numerically a minority, they still would not meet the criteria for a minority as they belonged to the ruling religious community, and hence the Christian educational institutions today should not enjoy minority status. In his opinion, Muslims were not a minority because under British rule both Hindus and Muslims were considered equals. Citing Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, the founder of the MAO College, Dwivedi claimed that the Muslim community never considered itself as a minority and instead as rulers prior to the British government. Respondents also argued through Neeraj Kishan Kaul that the 1981 amendment to the AMU Act, 1920 attempted to rewrite history by disregarding historical facts acknowledged in Azeez Basha. He stated that the parliament cannot “deny a fact by subsequent legislation” by creating “legal fiction.” He asserted that the 1981 amendment only attempted to change who “established” the university but made no change in the provision related to the administration of the university. Another counsel, Guru Krishnakumar, relying on Indra Sawhney (II) v Union of India (1999), stated that a fact established by a legislation cannot override facts recognised by the Court. He underscored that the moment there is a factual finding in a judgment, the legislature cannot overcome that fact using subsequent legislation. It was argued by advocate Kaul that any alteration to the status of AMU would only be through a constitutional amendment—unlike the procedure adopted by the Parliament in 1981. However, Justice Sanjiv Khanna added that the legislature is allowed to make laws with a retrospective effect if they feel a mistake has to be corrected. He also pointed out that amendments were made to the AMU Act in 1951 and 1965 as well. The CJI justice D.Y. Chandrachud cautioned that Kaul’s interpretation would have the effect of diluting the power of the Parliament. The petitioners argued that AMU was merely an extension of the MAO College which, according to Azeez Basha, was established by the Muslim community to impart liberal education for Muslims and therefore recognised it as a minority institution. The effect of the transformation of the ‘MAO College’ into ‘Aligarh Muslim University’ was merely a change in status of the educational institution – and not a birth of an altogether new or distinct educational institution. The court in Aziz Basha erroneously drew an inference that AMU was established by the Government of India and not the Muslim community, because the Muslim community could have established a university without the need for legislation or statute. It must be noted that all the assets of the MAO College were used to develop AMU. This includes the teaching staff, the property, the funds, and its administrative staff and a corpus of rupees thirty lakhs, as the then government insisted that it would only establish a university if this condition is met. The Azeez Basha judgment came as a huge shock to the minorities in general and Muslims in particular. Most of them considered that in independent India their educational institutions were well protected by article 30 of the Constitution, but the decision belied the assurances given to them a few years ago by no other than the SC itself in the Kerala Education Bill(1958) case: “So long as the Constitution stands as it is and is not altered, it is, we conceive, the duty of this court to uphold the fundamental rights and thereby honour our sacred obligation to the minority communities who are of our own”. In the opinion of eminent jurist H.M. Seervai, the Azeez Basha was the first case in which the SC had departed from the broad spirit in which it had decided cases on cultural and educational rights of minorities. The Azeez Basha, therefore, must be struck down for being wrong and contradictory. **************************** * The author is professor at AMU and heads strategic and security studies programme of the university. His research interests include human rights, constitutional law and public international law. -------- URL: https://newageislam.com/islamic-society/legal-issues-amu-minority-status-case/d/133622 New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism

Proving the unprovable

By Sumit Paul, New Age Islam 05 November, 2024 This pertains to an outright vapid write up, " Faith and figures: Why many great mathematicians and scientists have believed in god." This appeared on the NAI site a few days ago. What does this article suggest and what does the writer want to prove? I'm clueless. If many great scientists and mathematicians have believed in god and religion then even more didn't believe in god. Scientists and mathematicians Francis Crick, Richard Feynman, Paul Dirac, Andrei Sakharov, Niels Bohr, Subramanyan Chandrashekhar, Ivan Pavlov, Fred Hoyle, Pierre Curie, Meghnad Saha, Hans Bethe, Stephen Hawking, John McCarthy (he was an American computer scientist and cognitive scientist who was one of the founders of the discipline of artificial intelligence) to name but a few, were outright atheists. So was Maharshi Kanad, who was an ancient Indian sage / scientist, who is considered the propounder of Atomic theory way back in the sixth century BCE. This sage philosopher also founded the philosophical school of Vaisheshika. Panini, the first descriptive linguist in the world and Sanskrit grammarian who wrote Ashtadhyai, was an atheist. That his descendants embraced Islam (or had to embrace Islam) is an altogether different story. Today, they're known as Panini Muslims. The 17th-century Maharashtrian Sanskrit grammarian Bhattoji Dikshit, who simplified Panini's rules of Sanskrit grammar and wrote Siddhant Kaumudi, was a non-believer. Sage Yagyavalkya never believed in god and had no faith in esoteric beliefs. At least a couple of great Persian mystics were closet atheists. Great Iranian poet Urfi, not exactly a mystic and who was in the court of Mughal emperor Akbar, was a non-believer who never shared his atheistic views with anyone so long as he was alive. Believers and non-believers have existed cheek by jowl right from the beginning. In fact, thinking people of all ages have atheistic and agnostic leanings. The great novelist and Nobel laureate Ernest Hemingway famously proclaimed that “All thinking men are atheists." He not only disbelieved in god but also considered organised religion as a menace to human happiness. Mr Naseer's repeated glorification of theism and belief in divinity is delusional as well as monomaniac. He must understand that awe and wonderment have nothing to do with one's faith in something divine. Try to imbibe the spirit of Frank Lloyd Wright's famous quote, “I believe in god, only I spell it nature." Wright had no faith in your god and organised faith. In poetry and literature, one often resorts to god as a metaphor or an emblem. Remember Sahir's famous last stanza, ' Hum Log Khilaune Hain Ik Aise Khiladi Ke/ Jis Ko Abhi Sadiyon Tak Ye Khel Rachana Hai, ' from his immortal number, "Sansaar Ki Har Shai Ka Itna Hi Fasana Hai/ Ik Dhund Se Aana Hai, Ik Dhund Mein Jaana Hai” (Film: Dhund, 1973). Did the last stanza make an avowed atheist like Sahir a believer? Every coin has two sides. Don't try to prove things, ideas and concepts that are patently unprovable. You'll end up making a spectacle of yourself. …………. A regular columnist for New Age Islam, Sumit Paul is a researcher in comparative religions, with special reference to Islam. He has contributed articles to the world's premier publications in several languages including Persian. ----- URL: https://newageislam.com/interfaith-dialogue/proving-unprovable/d/133623 New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism

SC Status to Muslim Converts - Wait Time Extended

By Syed Ali Mujtaba, New Age Islam 05 November, 2024 Chennai- The three-member commission headed by former Chief Justice of India Justice K.G. Balakrishnan has been granted a one-year extension to finalize its report on whether Scheduled Caste (SC) status would be given to the Muslims and Christian converts. The report of Justice Ranganath Mishra Commission in 2007 recommended that SC status should be given to the Dalits belonging to the Muslim and Christian converts. The government called Justice Ranganath Mishra Commission's report “flawed.” By the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, the right to reservations in jobs and education is given only to people from Hindu, Sikh, and Buddhist faiths belonging to the SC community. A clutch of petitions seeking to repel the 1950 order is lying before the Supreme Court. These petitions seek the benefit of reservation being extended to Dalits who have converted to Christianity or Islam. This case has been pending for two decades now. The apex court has said that the day had come to take a call on issues with social ramifications. The government informed the Supreme Court that it had formed a three-member panel headed by former CJI KG Balakrishnan to examine whether SC status can be granted to Dalit Muslims and Christians. The Justice K.G. Balakrishnan commission panel is mandated to explore inclusion of the Dalit converts from other religions. The commission has faced delays in initiating field visits, a critical part of its work. The commission is also gathering insights from different States and Union Territories regarding the socio-economic conditions of Dalit converts. These reasons besides others made the Supreme Court grant a year extension to the Balakrishnan Commission panel. Opposing reservation to the Muslim and Dalit converts, the Union government told the Supreme Court that Scheduled Caste (SC) status was not granted to the Dalits who have converted to Islam or Christianity because social stigma such as untouchability is not prevalent in these two religions. The Centre also argued against the inclusion of Dalit Christians and Muslims in the SC list, citing the foreign origin of these religions. It called Justice Ranganath Mishra Commission report flawed because it was not prepared without conducting any field studies and failed to consider the effect that the inclusion would have on the present castes listed as SCs. The Centre further said, if all the converts are arbitrarily given the perks of reservation without examining the aspect of social disability it would cause a grave injustice and would be an abuse of the process of law, consequently affecting the rights of the SC groups. M. H. Jawahirullah, MLA from Papanasam Constituency in Tamil Nadu debunked the government’s argument against reservation to the SC converts to Islam and Christianity saying “Changing your religion does not change your social status. A person's caste remains unchanged even after converting to a different religion. A Dalit remains a Dalit even if he converts to Islam or Christianity.” ---- Syed Ali Mujtaba is a journalist based in Chennai. He can be contacted at syedalimujtaba2007@gmail.com ------- URL: https://newageislam.com/current-affairs/status-muslim-converts-extended/d/133624 New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism

A Journey of Unity: Bhakti Poets and Sufi Saints in India

By Sahil Razvi, New Age Islam 05 November, 2024 The Bhakti and Sufi movements championed unity and universal love across religious divides, fostering India’s rich composite culture. This spirit of Sulh-e-Kul (universal peace) remains integral to Indian society, promoting coexistence and mutual respect. Main points. · Bhakti and Sufi movements emphasized humanity and unity beyond caste or religion. · Sulh-e-Kul (universal peace) became a guiding principle through Sufi teachings. · Indian poets like Kabir and Vidyapati blended Persian and Urdu in their works, symbolizing cultural synthesis. · Sufi practices, like langar, influenced Sikhism and celebrated shared values. · This heritage of unity continues as the foundation of India’s Ganga-Jamuni tehzeeb (composite culture). The Bhakti Movement, much like India’s own cultural tapestry, is a rich blend of diverse voices and perspectives. Both Hindu and Muslim saint-poets set aside distinctions of caste and religion, celebrating love and humanity while drawing inspiration from the Sufi ideals of compassion, unity, and divine connection. While the movement took root as early as the 8th century with the Alvar saints in South India, it gained fresh vigour after Kabir’s time. The seeds of Hindu-Muslim harmony sown by Hazrat Amir Khusrau blossomed into a movement that spanned India, encouraging values of unity and respect across faiths. A concept in physics tells us that everything in the universe naturally seeks to come together. The Sufi philosophy embraced this notion and transformed it into Sulh-e-Kul or ‘Universal Peace.’ This doctrine promoted an inclusive approach, where Vedanta’s Neti Neti ("not this, not that") transcended in Sufi philosophy to Iti Iti ("this too, and that too"), encouraging a harmonious acceptance of all. One story illustrates this spirit well: a man once questioned Maulana Rumi, challenging his claim of being in agreement with all 72 sects. The man argued that a Christian and a Muslim, or a Muslim and a Hindu, could never truly agree with each other. Rumi, with his characteristic warmth, simply smiled and replied, “I even agree with you.” This deep acceptance of diverse perspectives came to be known in India as Sulh-e-Kul, a principle celebrated by poets and saints alike, expressing an inclusive and holistic view of spirituality. Amir Khusrau championed this inclusive path, followed by poet Vidyapati, who embedded Persian vocabulary within his works like Kirtilata and Kirtipataka, symbolizing a mutual cultural exchange and acceptance. Kabir’s verses also reflect this blend, filled with Urdu and Persian expressions, showcasing a merging of languages and ideas. The influence of Sufis on the Bhakti Movement was profound. Hazrat Ghaus Gwaliori, a prominent Sufi mystic, wrote about yogic practices in his book Bahru’l Hayat, while Malik Muhammad Jayasi enriched Hindi literature with works like Padmavat, Akhravat, and Kanahavat. In Kanahavat, Jayasi portrays Krishna not as a conquering ruler over Dwarka but as a spiritual figure establishing a Khanaqah (retreat), advocating peace and harmony. A wave of devotional poetry followed, with poets like Raskhan, Raslin, Mulla Daud, Qutban, and Manjan blending Hindu and Islamic sentiments. This poetic interweaving inspired Bharatendu Harishchandra, a 19th-century poet, to proclaim, “I would lay down my life for these Muslim saints.” Sufi influence on the Bhakti Movement can also be seen in practices like Langar (community kitchens), later embraced by Sikhism in its identical form. The inclusive teachings of both Sufi saints and Bhakti poets left a profound impact on Sikh scripture, the Guru Granth Sahib, which includes verses by Baba Farid, Kabir, and Ravidas. The foundation stone of the Golden Temple in Amritsar was even laid by the revered Qadri Sufi Hazrat Mian Mir, symbolizing the unity of Hindu and Muslim communities. The foundation of India’s Ganga-Jamuni Tehzeeb (composite culture) was enriched by the works of Sufi saints like Hazrat Turab Ali Shah Qalandar and Shah Kazim Qalandar, who composed devotional verses honouring Krishna. This shared heritage of Sulh-e-Kul continues to weave a strong thread of harmony, binding diverse communities and religions in India together. This spirit of unity is a lasting testament to the teachings of Bhakti poets and Sufi saints, fostering coexistence across India’s many paths and beliefs. ….. Sahil Razvi is an Author and Research scholar specialising in Sufism and History and an alumnus of Jamia Millia Islamia. ---------- URL: https://newageislam.com/islam-spiritualism/journey-bhakti-poets-sufi-saints-india/d/133625 New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism

Cultivating Sincerity and Responsibility in Dars-e-Nizami Education: A Guide to Spiritual Growth and Community Service

By Ghulam Ghaus Siddiqi, New Age Islam 04 November 2024 Setting Clear Goals for Dars-e-Nizami Education Main Points 1. Sincerity of Intention: Emphasizes the importance of students entering Dars-e-Nizami with a sincere intention to seek knowledge for the sake of Allah, free from worldly ambitions like fame or material gain. 2. Recognition of Allah: Discusses the significance of recognizing Allah’s oneness through the signs in creation, which deepens faith and enhances the understanding that everything operates under His command. 3. Shifting Priorities: Highlights how a deeper recognition of Allah leads to a focus on seeking His pleasure, shifting priorities from material concerns to living a life of righteousness and piety. 4. Rights of Allah and People: Explains the intertwined nature of fulfilling the rights of Allah (Huquq Allah) and the rights of people (Huquq al-Ibad), emphasizing that serving others is an essential aspect of worship. 5. Holistic Devotion: Advocates for a balanced approach to devotion that encompasses both personal acts of worship and ethical behavior in social interactions, leading to a just and compassionate society. … Before enrolling in a madrasa for Dars-e-Nizami education, it is essential for students to set clear goals, as these form the foundation for their entire learning experience. The primary objective should be to embark on this academic journey with sincerity of intention, free from worldly ambitions such as fame, status, or material gain. Instead, students should focus purely on acquiring knowledge for the sake of Allah. It is crucial to remember that religious education is not merely an intellectual pursuit; it is a means of personal and spiritual development. The true essence of this journey lies in deepening one’s recognition of Allah, developing a closer relationship with Him, and seeking His pleasure by understanding His commands. Moreover, students should approach their studies with humility, recognizing that religious knowledge carries a responsibility to serve the community and benefit others. It should never be used for personal gain or to assert superiority over others. This sincere approach will keep them grounded and focused, enabling them to truly benefit from the rich knowledge that Dars-e-Nizami offers. Recognizing Allah's Oneness Through the recognition of Allah, we come to understand that the Creator of the world is the One and only God, whose existence is eternal and all-encompassing. His presence is manifest in the countless signs He has placed throughout the universe. Every element in creation testifies to His oneness, power, and wisdom. For instance, the existence of trees, stones, the barren earth that comes to life after rainfall, and the predictable cycle of day and night are not random occurrences but clear demonstrations of Allah's meticulous design. The growth of crops, fruits, and flowers in different seasons, the balance of rainfall that sustains life, and the movements of celestial bodies like the sun, moon, and stars reflect divine order and harmony. Even more wondrous are the stages of human development—from conception in the mother’s womb to birth and growth, with each phase highlighting the miraculous nature of Allah’s creation. These signs scattered throughout the universe remind us of Allah’s eternal presence, deepening our faith and understanding that everything, no matter how small or grand, operates under His command. Shifting Priorities and Seeking Allah's Pleasure As a person advances in recognizing Allah and strengthens their faith, their life’s ultimate purpose becomes centered on seeking Allah’s pleasure. Worldly concerns take a backseat as they focus on aligning their thoughts, actions, and intentions with what pleases their Creator. Every decision is made with the awareness that life is temporary and that true success lies in earning Allah’s approval. The pursuit of material wealth, status, or recognition fades as the heart becomes firmly anchored in the desire to live a life of righteousness and piety. Such a person’s devotion grows stronger as they strive to fulfill Allah’s commands and avoid actions that might lead to His displeasure. They seek to cultivate virtues like patience, humility, gratitude, and compassion, knowing these traits bring them closer to Allah. Acts of worship, whether through prayer, charity, fasting, or kindness to others, become genuine expressions of love and submission to Allah. Their ultimate wish is that when they leave this world, they do so in a state where Allah is pleased with them. The thought of returning to their Creator with a heart free from worldly distractions and filled with faith gives them peace and contentment, motivating them to continuously purify their actions and intentions in preparation for the eternal life to come. Fulfilling the Rights of Allah and People Attaining Allah’s pleasure requires fulfilling two primary duties: the rights of Allah (Huquq Allah) and the rights of people (Huquq al-Ibad). These responsibilities are deeply intertwined, even though they may appear distinct. The rights of Allah include acts of worship like prayer, fasting, remembrance, and gratitude, while the rights of people encompass how we treat others, show kindness, uphold justice, and act with integrity. In reality, fulfilling the rights of people is part of fulfilling the rights of Allah because He has commanded us to honor and respect one another, protect the dignity of every individual, and act with mercy and compassion. By being honest in dealings, helping those in need, supporting family, or being kind to neighbors, we fulfill a divine obligation. Thus, honoring Huquq al-Ibad is also an act of worship, as it aligns with Allah’s will and contributes to the balance and harmony of society. Recognizing this connection leads to a realization that devotion to Allah extends beyond personal acts of worship to include behavior in all social and interpersonal dealings. True devotion requires a holistic approach, balancing religious duties with ethical responsibilities toward others. The Rights of Allah The rights of Allah begin with the belief that He is the only deity worthy of worship, with no partners or equals. This belief forms the foundation of a Muslim’s faith and includes recognizing His absolute oneness and sovereignty. Belief in all His messengers, culminating in the final Prophet, Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), is also essential. The Prophet’s life and teachings provide a model for living in accordance with Allah's will. Allah’s rights further include belief in all His revealed scriptures, especially the Qur'an, which serves as the ultimate guide. Muslims must also have faith in the unseen, including the resurrection, the Day of Judgment, and accountability for one’s deeds. Fulfilling Allah’s rights requires not only belief but also obedience to His commands, such as performing acts of worship like prayer, fasting, and charity, while following the Prophet’s Sunnah. These acts demonstrate a commitment to living according to divine guidance. Fulfilling Human Rights In addition to religious obligations, Muslims must uphold human rights, showing kindness, respect, and care toward parents, teachers, children, orphans, the elderly, and the poor. Muslims are required to protect the vulnerable and ensure the rights of others are not violated, contributing to the welfare of society. Conclusion True servitude to Allah is achieved when both the rights of Allah and the rights of people are fulfilled. One cannot claim sincerity in serving Allah while neglecting either responsibility. Religious education, therefore, should be pursued with the intention of understanding and applying these rights in daily life. Once gained, this knowledge should be shared with others, spreading awareness of the importance of fulfilling both the rights of Allah and the rights of people to create a just and compassionate society that reflects the values of Islam. … A regular Columnist with NewAgeIslam.com, Ghulam Ghaus Siddiqi Dehlvi is a Classical Islamic scholar with a rich Sufi Madrasa background and expertise in English-Arabic-Urdu translation. Throughout his career, he has emerged as a prominent figure in the realm of Islamic scholarship, consistently contributing valuable insights and analysis on a wide range of crucial topics. Through his regular writings, he has delved into multifaceted subjects, including but not limited to deradicalisation strategies, the promotion of moderation within Islamic teachings, counter-terrorism efforts, and the vital mission of combating Islamophobia. Moreover, he extensively addresses the urgent need to challenge radical ideologies through well-reasoned arguments and scholarly discourse. Beyond these critical issues, his work also encompasses in-depth discussions on human rights principles, the significance of safeguarding religious rights, and the profound exploration of Islamic mysticism. --------------- URL: https://newageislam.com/islam-spiritualism/dars-e-nizami-education-community-service-responsibility/d/133615 New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism