Triple talaq: Uniform Civil Code 'not good for nation', says Muslim Board

[email protected] (CD Network)
October 13, 2016

New Delhi, Oct 13: The Muslim Personal Law Board said on Thursday that a Law Commission questionnaire, to gauge public opinion on triple talaq and some other practices across religions, is a "fraud", that it will boycott it and that a uniform civil code is not good for India.

mlbThe Muslim Law Board also said that the law commission isn't acting independently and is instead acting at the behest of the Centre, which last week opposed the practice of triple talaq in the Supreme Court and said it can't be regarded as an essential part of religion.

"A uniform civil code is not good for this nation. There're so many cultures in this nation, (they) have to be respected. India can't impose a single ideology," said the Board's Hazrat Maulana Wali Rahmani at a press briefing today.

The Commission in its questionnaire asks whether triple talaq - which according to Islamic law based on the Koran permits a husband to pronounce talaq three times to instantly divorce his wife - should be abolished altogether, retained only in customs without legal sanctity, or retained with suitable amendments.

The Muslim Law Board has consistently said that triple talaq is a 'personal law' and hence cannot be modified by the Centre.

"We are living in this country with an agreement held by the constitution. The constitution has made us live and practice our religion. In America everyone follows their personal laws and identity, how come our nation doesn't want to follow their steps in this matter?" Rahmani said.

The Centre has countered the claim of the Muslim Law Board and said, "practices of triple talaq, polygamy and nikah halala cannot be regarded as essential part of religion and hence get no protection under fundamental right to religion."

Rahmani and other Board officials today also indicated that they feel Muslims are discriminated against.

"Muslims equally participated in India's freedom struggle, but their participation is always underestimated," a Board official said.

The Commission, though, said its questionnaire asks for opinion on practices across religions - not just Islam - that many call anti-women, Justice BS Chauhan, chairman of the Law Commission, said earlier.

For example, while one question on the list of 16 is about triple talaq, another is asking the public what steps are needed to "ensure that Hindu women are better able to exercise their right to property, which is often bequeathed to sons under customary practices".

Justice B S Chauhan, chairman of the Law Commission, said that formulating the questions was an elaborate affair involving several meetings of the Commission, in addition to consultations with numerous experts in the field.

"It took us two months to frame the questions keeping in mind prevailing customs and practices in different religions to elicit meaningful responses from the public," he said.

Comments

Naren kotian
 - 
Thursday, 13 Oct 2016

Accept the rule of land or just migrate where u r so called divine rule is followed ...our govt is in right direction ..so they don't care for these threats ...becoz bjp doesn't neeed people who think religion above constitution .one thing for sure ...our Shri Shri modiji ...our supreme thailava will ensure everybody sings vande mataram and say bharata mata ki jai ....yenu beda PDS and bhagyas kodolla andre mugithu ...haha....bholo bharat mata ki jai ...Vande mataram ..

Abdullla
 - 
Thursday, 13 Oct 2016

Without knowledge many people are challenging the divine Law...
and Muslim are giving you this knowledge... But many are HEEDLESS.
its their IGNORANCE that they did not go thru from the proper Source...

To get a little back ground on triple talaq... please watch below YT video and increase your knowledge before judging and interfering the DIVINE LAW ... it will be better for those who use their intellect as well as the society.

(MAJHA VISHESH: Aurangabad: Discussion on Ban Muslim Triple Talaq Law)

Or Please see how Br. Imran answers this question posed by an ADVOCATE...
(Br.Imran Answering About Triple Talaq To A Non Muslim Sister.)

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.
coastaldigest.com news network
May 21,2020

Bengaluru, May 21: Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa today slammed Law Minister JC Madhuswamy for yelling at a woman farmer in Kolar, an incident that attracted widespread criticism. 

The incident happened on Wednesday when Madhuswamy, who is also the minor irrigation minister, was inspecting the Koramangala-Challaghatta (KC) Valley project, under which Bengaluru’s sewage is treated and pumped into lakes in Kolar. 

During his visit, farmer Nalini Gowda questioned Madhuswamy on the encroachment of the 1,022-acre S Agrahara lake. At one point, Madhuswamy lost his cool and yelled, “Aye! Shut your mouth, rascal,” and asked the police to take her away. Before this, Madhuswamy told her, “Make a request. I’m a very bad man. You can only air your grievance. Don’t command us.” 

A video of this exchange was aired by news channels. 

“What (Madhuswamy) said is not right. I have warned him. None can forgive such an explicit manner of talking with a woman. That, too, behaving like that being a minister doesn’t bode well. I will talk to that woman also and I’ll ensure this doesn’t happen again,” Yediyurappa told reporters.

The incident has come as a shot in the arm to the Opposition Congress, which is already attacking the Yediyurappa administration on the COVID-19 crisis. Condemning Madhuswamy’s behaviour, Leader of the Opposition Siddaramaiah demanded an apology and asked Yediyurappa to sack him from the Cabinet. 

Karnataka Pradesh Congress Committee (KPCC) president D K Shivakumar said it was unbecoming of Madhuswamy to behave like that being a senior minister. “People will ask us questions and express their problems, naturally. What’s important is how we handle ourselves. Be it a woman or anyone, they come to us because we’re into public service. Calling them ‘rascal’ and things is not right. Maybe there was some irritation, but I agree with (Siddaramaiah) that he should be dropped from the Cabinet,” he said.

On his part, Madhuswamy said he felt intimidated. “If I have hurt the feelings of any woman, I will certainly apologise,” he said. “But citizens should realise, we go to their villages to ask about their problems. If they start abusing us publicly, how can we work? My secretary and I heard her for five minutes and then told her that we know our responsibility. We asked her to close the issue. She didn’t stop and I got tempted (sic),” the minister said.

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 11,2020

Mangaluru, May 11: Hundreds of migrant labourers today gathered at a service bus stand in Mangaluru to return to Uttar Pradesh and Jharkhand.

They were working in different parts of Dakshina Kannada and remained stranded without a job after the announcement of lockdown.

Labourers said that they have not registered with Seva Sindhu portal to avail pass for travelling outside the state.

Though all the people who gathered wore a mask, the physical distancing norm was not followed.

Already three Shramik trains from Mangaluru had left for Jharkhand, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar with nearly 3,500 stranded labourers in the last two days.

The gathered labourers are anticipating that they would be allowed to travel to their destinations in the Shramik trains that will leave in the evening from Mangaluru.

The doctors and paramedical staff who have arrived the spot are checking the health of the labourers before allowing them to travel to the railway station.

The cost of a ticket to Uttar Pradesh is Rs 1,040 per person (which includes bus fare from service bus stand to railway station, food and water bottle).

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.