Muslims should protect cows; Prophet was against beef: Ajmer Dargah chief

July 29, 2016

ajmerJaipur, Jul 29: The spiritual head of Ajmer Dargah Zainul Abedin Ali Khan on Thursday said the Muslim community should present an example by protecting cows which hold religious significance for Hindus.

He also suggested that those who create violence over the issue of beef should avoid doing it and called upon both the communities to live with harmony and unity in the interest of the country.

“Some elements are trying to disturb the harmony between Hindu and Muslim communities on the issue of beef. Cow is the religious symbol for Hindus but the issue of beef has become a new weapon of religion which is having a negative impact on the image of the country,” he said in a statement.

Khan, who is the Deewan of the shrine of Sufi saint Khwaja Moinuddin Chisti, said Prophet Muhammad in his preaching was also against eating beef and there is no evidence in history of any Sufi saint or religious leader eating beef.

Comments

shaji
 - 
Sunday, 31 Jul 2016

I am sure this Dargah chief will allow shetering cows in his Dargah to make Hindus happy. let this Muzawar also allow cows to stay in his house as guests which will definately give him lots of ad and will be famous.

SK
 - 
Saturday, 30 Jul 2016

Mone... Moodbidri.... What do you say about this statement from The Soofi Dargah worshiper....

Rikaz
 - 
Friday, 29 Jul 2016

If prophet is against beef....good...but why should muslims protect them????????

Dhurga is also against Islam...could you stop cheating????

Ahmed
 - 
Friday, 29 Jul 2016

Who will believe even if Muslims are protecting cows,
The trend is, if Muslim have a cow for Milking purpose, Bajrangis will attack on the pretext of cow slaughter
If Muslim is having a cow for agriculture purpose, Banjrangis will attack on the pretext of cow slaughter
Cow is not the cause, but, they just need a reason to attack Muslims,
If the Cow problem is solved, then they will come up with Bakri reason, then Murgi reason, then Machli reason, Its never ending story till RSS is alive

Satyameva jayate
 - 
Friday, 29 Jul 2016

This program is sponsored to you by...modees sangheez.....what has the mushriq Sarah chief to say about baqarah and adhaa?.....

Rauf
 - 
Friday, 29 Jul 2016

ohh my god this person doesnt know Prophhet SAW said there is no place for Shirk and it is Haram and this guy in his life he is done full of Shirk, Mr. Zainul you are not a right person to give any commmnts without Hadith Quote, better you Shut your mouth

abu safwan
 - 
Friday, 29 Jul 2016

there is no impotant place for dargha in islam

mohammad n
 - 
Friday, 29 Jul 2016

Hey dargaparasthi
Muslims should not protect darghas,
prophet is against darghas.

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
July 25,2020

Gokak, Jul 25: A JMFC magistrate here issued summons to the Chief minister B S Yediyurappa in relation to a complaint for the alleged violation of election code of conduct, during by-elections to the Gokak Assembly seat held last year.

According to official sources, a complaint had been registered against Chief minister B S Yediyurappa during the election campaign, under the People Representative Act, for allegedly wooing voters during electioneering.

The Gokak Police, who had investigated the case, however had submitted a 'B' report to the court letting off the Chief minister from the charges.

However the Magistrate, rejecting the Police report, had maintained that there exists prima facie case against the accused and issued summons to appear before the court on September one, the sources added.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Ram Puniyani
January 22,2020

Shivaji is a great icon in Maharashtra. Different sections of society have given him very high status, though for diverse reasons. Folklores about him abound in the state. His statues, popular songs on him are very prevalent. These folk songs (Powadas) praise his multifarious actions. So it was no surprise that when Jayabhagwan Goyal, released his book, ‘Aaj ka Shivaji: Narendra Modi’, at religious-cultural meet organized by Delhi BJP, there was a strong resentment in Maharashtra. Various leaders from Maharashtra were furious. The Shiv Sena leader Sanjay Raut challenged the Shivaji’s descendent, Sambhaji Raje who is in BJP and is member of Rajya Sabha, to resign on the issue. Sambhaji Raje in turn stated that "We respect Narendra Modi, who was elected as the prime minister of the country for the second time. But neither (Narendra) Modi nor anybody else in the world can be compared with Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj,"

Not to be left behind Jitendra Awhad of NCP felt Modi-BJP are insulting the pride of Maharashtra. It is not the first time that controversy is erupting around the Maharashtra warrior of medieval period. Earlier we had seen Sambhaji Brigrade demanding the ban on James Laine book, Shivaji: ‘A Hindu King in an Islamic Kingdom’, for its objectionable content. Bhandarkar Institute in Pune, which had helped James Laine in his research, was also vandalized. At another level there was a talk that Babasaheb Purandare, a Brahmin, who has written some popular material on Shivaji will be made as the Chairman of the committee for statue of Shivaji. Maratha Mahasangh and Shiv Dharm officials objected to a Brahmin heading the committee for a statue for the Maratha warrior. The caste angel in Shivaji’s case is coming to the fore from quite some time.

While there is no dearth of controversies around Shivaji, it is also true that each political tendency has created Shivaji’s image from their political point of view. Who was the real Shivaji, is the question. One can see two clear streams of projection in this matter. On one hand there is an attempt to present Shivaji as the anti Muslim King, a king who was respecting Cows and Brahmins (Go Brahman pratipalak). This view was brought forward from the times of Lokmanya Tilak and picked up by Hindu nationalists, who have been looking for icons in history to suit their political agenda. Nathram Godse, while criticizing Gandhi says that Gandhi’s nationalism was dwarf in front of the one of Shivaji or Rana Pratap.

In tune with this the Hindu nationalists are promoting both these as icons of Hindu nationalism and giving anti-Muslim slant to the whole discourse. This discourse also hides in this the Brahmanical agenda of Hindu nationalism as Cows and Brahmins are presented as the central object of veneration by Shivaji. This image of Shivaji fits well into the current agenda of Hindu nationalists, being spearheaded by RSS Combine.

It is because of this that for seeking votes in Mumbai Narendra Modi on the eve of 2014 elections stated that Shivaji attacked Surat to plunder the treasury of Aurangzeb. This also presents Shivaji-Aurangzeb, Shivaji-Afzal Khan interactions as battle between Hindus and Muslims. The truth is that Surat was plundered for its wealth as it was a rich port city and Bal Samant’s book on the topic gives in depth description of the same. It is noteworthy that Shivaji began his real career of conquest in 1656 when he conquered Javli from the Maratha Chief Chandra Rao More. He took over the treasures of this kingdom. That it was not a Hindu Muslim battle becomes clear when we know that in confrontation with Aurangzeb it was Mirza Raja Jaisingh who was negotiating and engaging with Shivaji on behalf of Aurangzeb. And Shivaji had Muslim officers like Kazi Haider as confidential secretary and many Muslim Generals in his army.

Darya Sarang was chief of armor division, Daulat Khan was in-charge of his naval division; Ibrahim Khan was another general of significance in his army.  This mixed up administration just shows that the kings were not having Hindu or Muslim administration depending on their religion. In the confrontation between Shivaji and Afzal Khan, Rustam-e-Jaman was Shivaji’s side and Afzal Khan had Krisnaji Bhaskar Kulkarni on his side.

As far as Shivaji’s popularity is concerned it was due to his being a King with welfare of his subjects in his mind. He lightened the burden of taxation on the average peasants, and reduced the domination of landlords over the serfs. This picture of Shivaji is well documents in the booklets by Com. Govind Pansare (Who was Shivaji) and Jayant Gadkari (Shivaji: Ek Lok Kalyankari Raja- Shivaji: King doing People’s Welfare). He did not belong to the warrior caste so Brahmins had refused to coronate him, for which purpose Gaga Bhatt a Brahmin from Kashi was brought in with heavy fees. Teesta Setalvad’s hand book on History for teachers underlined this fact.

Today while BJP-Brahmanical forces want to present Shivaji as worshipper of Brahmins and cows, the non upper caste have seen through the game. As such it was Jotirao Phule who brought forward the caste angel of Shivaji as he wrote Powada (Poem) in his honor and today dalit Bahujan are not toeing Hindu Nationalist projection on the issue.

The likes of Jayabhagwan Goyal of BJP as such are trying to give two messages through such attempts. One hand they want to paint Shivaji in anti Muslim and Brahmanical color, they also want to give the subtle message of similarity of this presentation of Shivaji with what Modi is doing. Non BJP forces have seen this game and want to present the other picture of Shivaji, which was highlighted by the likes of Jotirao Phule and which today many of those standing for rights of dalit-Bahujan are trying to articulate. The criticism of the said, book, since withdrawn is on these twin aspects. One about the picture of Shivaji who was concerned about welfare of the farmers, and two his respect for people of all religions.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
May 25,2020

Bengaluru, May 25: The 36-hour marathon lockdown call given by Karnataka Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa, passed off peacefully with people opting to remain inside their houses and cooperate with the state government to fight against spread of deadly Covid-19.

Though the call was only for 24 hours from 7 am (Sunday) to 7 am (Monday) another 12 hours was added to it as the night curfew was already in force from 7 pm on Saturday and the next day (Sunday) it continued till Monday up to 7 am.

Autorickshaws and bus service were off the road giving a tough time to people arriving from neighbouring places reach home that too during the night. Adding to their woes was heavy rain that lashed the city for more than two hours on Sunday evening flooding the streets.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.