This article is Brother A. Khalid Addehlawi
The verdict on the Babri Masjid came amid a very tense & heated environment with a curfew like situation all over India. In some of the cities, an emergency holiday was declared for schools as well as offices.
The verdict on the title issue was announced and read to the public in the late after noon at the high court in Allahabad, UP. The verdict came to be a source of happiness for some and sadness for others. For the Muslims whose right to the property was taken away and their hopes to rebuild the babri masjid broken it was a sad day since they were given only 1/3rd of the disputed land and the would be allocated land for them will not be where the babri masjid stood since the title to it goes to the Hindus. The remaining 2/3 rd would go to two different Hindu parties where the Ram Janambhoomi Temple and other Hindu religious structures would be built.
This verdict which evidently is not based on solid evidences rather on possibilities and assumptions establishes a dangerous precedent and shows the fallacy and the failure of the Secular democratic system which proves that the rights of the minorities cannot be guaranteed in this system.
The major premise upon which the final verdict was given was the finding of the Archaeological survey of india (ASI) where they found certain idols and scripts in sanskrit which they claimed could have been from a temple that existed before the mosque was built, there is no historical proof that a temple ever existed in the disputed place. Further the ASI's verdict which is based on their archaelogical study is an incomplete one and prone to errors as any archaeological survey is open to debate and different inferences. It is noteworthy that the ASI did not take into consideration the fact that during the excavation there were graves and other artifacts which would prove that the site belonged to muslims prior to the building of the mosque.
The Application of the same premise with regards to the existence of artifacts or other assumptions used during this trial on an international senario will lead us to certain other conclusions, The Red Indians will have a larger right to Run the white house (and they dont need archaeological evidences to prove that, history itself is a testament to it) and further, the aborigines will have the right to drive the Aussies out of Australia and the illegal entity of Israel will have a right to build a temple in the place of Masjid al Aqsa (they already are excavating tunnels under the masjid so as to weaken its foundation after the collapse of which they will have reason to debate the existence of the temple and hence their right to build it much akin to the reality of the Babri masjid, its destruction and eventually the muslims losing the case in the favour of the hindus). There are certain evidences that even prove the visit of Israeli Security officials visiting india just before the destruction of the Babri Masjid.
1. A verdict like todays may result in devastating results for the Muslim in the geopolitical scenario.
Islam on the other hand guarantee's security and upholds the rights of the minorities that live in the Islamic State, The dhimmis (non Muslims citizens) in the Islamic state have more rights than the Muslim and the Prophet (saw) equated hurting the dhimmis to hurting himself (saw) and Allah (swt).
The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “He who hurts a dhimmi hurts me, and he who hurts me annoys Allah.” Reported by al-Tabarani in Al-awsat on good authority.
The dhimmi enjoy the same economic benefits as Muslims. They can be employees, establish companies, be partners with Muslims and buy and sell goods. Their wealth is protected and if they are poor and unable to find work they are entitled to state benefits from the Khilafah’s Treasury (Bait ul-Mal).
Cecil Roth mentions that the treatment of the Jews at the hands of the Ottoman State attracted Jews from all over Western Europe. The land of Islam became the land of opportunity. Jewish physicians from the school of Salanca were employed in the service of the Sultan and the Viziers (ministers). In many places glass making and metalworking were Jewish monopolies, and with their knowledge of foreign languages, they were the greatest competitors of the Venetian traders.
2. Umar ibn al-Khattab once passed by an old dhimmi begging at doors, and said: “We have not done justice to you if we have taken jizya from you in the prime of your youth and neglected you in your old age.” He then ordered from the treasury what was suitable for him.
3. It was Aurangzeb the most misrepresented ruler in Indian history about the Mughal empire who constructed a huge temple in Chitrakut (Uttar Pradesh) and made arrangements for the 'bhog' at this temple for generations. The firmaan (edict) for the construction of this temple written by Aurangzeb himself is still in possession of the mahant of the temple in Chitrakut near Allahabad. This is apart from the other firmaans by the same ruler for the allocation and building of temples at mahakaleshwara, Ujjain, balaji , chitrakut, Umanand, Gauhati and the Jain of Shatrunjai and other temples and gurudwaras scattered over Northern India. These Firmaan's were issued from 1065AH (1659) to 1091AH (1685).
4. The verdicts in Islam are not given based on assumptions , hypothesis or possibilities rather they are based on solid evidences and clear proof and it is Islam that honours the rights of the minorities which is evidently non existent in the Capitalist democratic system.
The most famous example of this justice is in the legal trial of a Jew who stole the coat of Armour of Imam Ali (ra) as he was travelling to a battle. The judge Shurayh made no exception for Ali (ra) even though he was the Khaleefah, a Muslim and also off to fight in a battle so was in desperate need of his armour. Shurayh ruled in favour of the Jew and accepted his testimony in court. Although Ali had brought his son as a witness the judge according to the ahkam (rules of islam) didn’t except his son as the witness and awarded the armour to the jew. On seeing the justice the jew excepted that he had stolen the armour and he embraced Islam.
The judge knew that Ali (rA) would not be lying but since he did not have any evidence the verdict was given in favour of the thief. This incident and thousands of other incidents of Islamic history show how just the Islamic system was.
Ironically todays' judgement clearly showed that the judges even had differences among each other with Justice Sibgatullah khan denying the destruction of any temple before the construction of the mosque in the disputed place. This in itself shows the contradiction in the verdict by the court. A move to the Supreme court as proposed by many of the Muslim leaders will clearly result in a similar hopeless verdict , not because of the lack of evidences by the Muslims rather due to the failure of the Capitalist Judicial system.
Let us not forget that the Capitalist system has been unable to secure the rights of the people that live under it not to mention its failing values and systems. It is the capitalist system which has been unable to uplift the 300 Million odd dalits who are considered to be a backward caste from amongst the Hindus. Paradoxically its mind boggling that how can this system give justice when they have not even provided the dalits with the basic right to enter any Hindu Temple (Dalits, considered to be a scheduled backward caste are looked down upon by the higher castes and do not have a right to enter temples except for the ones that are earmarked for them).
Much unlike the English who massacared the Red Indians and eliminated them from existence and their culture or the Aryans who butchered the Sub Continental population thousands of years ago and destroyed their temples and drove the original population towards the south or the Spanish who undertook the inquisition and were responsible for the destruction of the Inca civilisation & the Aztecs, The khilafah made sure that the security of places of worship of all religions whether the minority or the majority was taken care of, the millions of majority Hindus, Christians and Jews and the thousands of temples existent today all over india tell a story of tolerance , peace and justice of the Islamic Khilafah.
It is the Islamic system which through its sincere leadership, The Khilafah will be able to guarantee the rights of the minorities , muslims and non muslims and uphold the sanctity of their sacred lands and establish a just and peaceful society much like it did during the Khilafah al Rashida.
The Prophet (saw) said "the Imam is a shield behind whom you fight and protect yourself.
Reference
1.http://www.countercurrents.org/prashad261208.htm
2. Cecil Roth, ‘The House of Nasi: Dona Gracia
3. Abu ‘Ubayd al-Qasim ibn Sallam, ‘The Book of Revenue,’ Translation of Kitab al-Amwal, Garnet Publishing Ltd, p. 42
4. Singhal, Damodar Prasad (2003). A History of the Indian People, Cosmo (Publications, India); New Ed edition. ISBN 8170200148.
The verdict on the Babri Masjid came amid a very tense & heated environment with a curfew like situation all over India. In some of the cities, an emergency holiday was declared for schools as well as offices.
The verdict on the title issue was announced and read to the public in the late after noon at the high court in Allahabad, UP. The verdict came to be a source of happiness for some and sadness for others. For the Muslims whose right to the property was taken away and their hopes to rebuild the babri masjid broken it was a sad day since they were given only 1/3rd of the disputed land and the would be allocated land for them will not be where the babri masjid stood since the title to it goes to the Hindus. The remaining 2/3 rd would go to two different Hindu parties where the Ram Janambhoomi Temple and other Hindu religious structures would be built.
This verdict which evidently is not based on solid evidences rather on possibilities and assumptions establishes a dangerous precedent and shows the fallacy and the failure of the Secular democratic system which proves that the rights of the minorities cannot be guaranteed in this system.
The major premise upon which the final verdict was given was the finding of the Archaeological survey of india (ASI) where they found certain idols and scripts in sanskrit which they claimed could have been from a temple that existed before the mosque was built, there is no historical proof that a temple ever existed in the disputed place. Further the ASI's verdict which is based on their archaelogical study is an incomplete one and prone to errors as any archaeological survey is open to debate and different inferences. It is noteworthy that the ASI did not take into consideration the fact that during the excavation there were graves and other artifacts which would prove that the site belonged to muslims prior to the building of the mosque.
The Application of the same premise with regards to the existence of artifacts or other assumptions used during this trial on an international senario will lead us to certain other conclusions, The Red Indians will have a larger right to Run the white house (and they dont need archaeological evidences to prove that, history itself is a testament to it) and further, the aborigines will have the right to drive the Aussies out of Australia and the illegal entity of Israel will have a right to build a temple in the place of Masjid al Aqsa (they already are excavating tunnels under the masjid so as to weaken its foundation after the collapse of which they will have reason to debate the existence of the temple and hence their right to build it much akin to the reality of the Babri masjid, its destruction and eventually the muslims losing the case in the favour of the hindus). There are certain evidences that even prove the visit of Israeli Security officials visiting india just before the destruction of the Babri Masjid.
1. A verdict like todays may result in devastating results for the Muslim in the geopolitical scenario.
Islam on the other hand guarantee's security and upholds the rights of the minorities that live in the Islamic State, The dhimmis (non Muslims citizens) in the Islamic state have more rights than the Muslim and the Prophet (saw) equated hurting the dhimmis to hurting himself (saw) and Allah (swt).
The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “He who hurts a dhimmi hurts me, and he who hurts me annoys Allah.” Reported by al-Tabarani in Al-awsat on good authority.
The dhimmi enjoy the same economic benefits as Muslims. They can be employees, establish companies, be partners with Muslims and buy and sell goods. Their wealth is protected and if they are poor and unable to find work they are entitled to state benefits from the Khilafah’s Treasury (Bait ul-Mal).
Cecil Roth mentions that the treatment of the Jews at the hands of the Ottoman State attracted Jews from all over Western Europe. The land of Islam became the land of opportunity. Jewish physicians from the school of Salanca were employed in the service of the Sultan and the Viziers (ministers). In many places glass making and metalworking were Jewish monopolies, and with their knowledge of foreign languages, they were the greatest competitors of the Venetian traders.
2. Umar ibn al-Khattab once passed by an old dhimmi begging at doors, and said: “We have not done justice to you if we have taken jizya from you in the prime of your youth and neglected you in your old age.” He then ordered from the treasury what was suitable for him.
3. It was Aurangzeb the most misrepresented ruler in Indian history about the Mughal empire who constructed a huge temple in Chitrakut (Uttar Pradesh) and made arrangements for the 'bhog' at this temple for generations. The firmaan (edict) for the construction of this temple written by Aurangzeb himself is still in possession of the mahant of the temple in Chitrakut near Allahabad. This is apart from the other firmaans by the same ruler for the allocation and building of temples at mahakaleshwara, Ujjain, balaji , chitrakut, Umanand, Gauhati and the Jain of Shatrunjai and other temples and gurudwaras scattered over Northern India. These Firmaan's were issued from 1065AH (1659) to 1091AH (1685).
4. The verdicts in Islam are not given based on assumptions , hypothesis or possibilities rather they are based on solid evidences and clear proof and it is Islam that honours the rights of the minorities which is evidently non existent in the Capitalist democratic system.
The most famous example of this justice is in the legal trial of a Jew who stole the coat of Armour of Imam Ali (ra) as he was travelling to a battle. The judge Shurayh made no exception for Ali (ra) even though he was the Khaleefah, a Muslim and also off to fight in a battle so was in desperate need of his armour. Shurayh ruled in favour of the Jew and accepted his testimony in court. Although Ali had brought his son as a witness the judge according to the ahkam (rules of islam) didn’t except his son as the witness and awarded the armour to the jew. On seeing the justice the jew excepted that he had stolen the armour and he embraced Islam.
The judge knew that Ali (rA) would not be lying but since he did not have any evidence the verdict was given in favour of the thief. This incident and thousands of other incidents of Islamic history show how just the Islamic system was.
Ironically todays' judgement clearly showed that the judges even had differences among each other with Justice Sibgatullah khan denying the destruction of any temple before the construction of the mosque in the disputed place. This in itself shows the contradiction in the verdict by the court. A move to the Supreme court as proposed by many of the Muslim leaders will clearly result in a similar hopeless verdict , not because of the lack of evidences by the Muslims rather due to the failure of the Capitalist Judicial system.
Let us not forget that the Capitalist system has been unable to secure the rights of the people that live under it not to mention its failing values and systems. It is the capitalist system which has been unable to uplift the 300 Million odd dalits who are considered to be a backward caste from amongst the Hindus. Paradoxically its mind boggling that how can this system give justice when they have not even provided the dalits with the basic right to enter any Hindu Temple (Dalits, considered to be a scheduled backward caste are looked down upon by the higher castes and do not have a right to enter temples except for the ones that are earmarked for them).
Much unlike the English who massacared the Red Indians and eliminated them from existence and their culture or the Aryans who butchered the Sub Continental population thousands of years ago and destroyed their temples and drove the original population towards the south or the Spanish who undertook the inquisition and were responsible for the destruction of the Inca civilisation & the Aztecs, The khilafah made sure that the security of places of worship of all religions whether the minority or the majority was taken care of, the millions of majority Hindus, Christians and Jews and the thousands of temples existent today all over india tell a story of tolerance , peace and justice of the Islamic Khilafah.
It is the Islamic system which through its sincere leadership, The Khilafah will be able to guarantee the rights of the minorities , muslims and non muslims and uphold the sanctity of their sacred lands and establish a just and peaceful society much like it did during the Khilafah al Rashida.
The Prophet (saw) said "the Imam is a shield behind whom you fight and protect yourself.
Reference
1.http://www.countercurrents.org/prashad261208.htm
2. Cecil Roth, ‘The House of Nasi: Dona Gracia
3. Abu ‘Ubayd al-Qasim ibn Sallam, ‘The Book of Revenue,’ Translation of Kitab al-Amwal, Garnet Publishing Ltd, p. 42
4. Singhal, Damodar Prasad (2003). A History of the Indian People, Cosmo (Publications, India); New Ed edition. ISBN 8170200148.
Comments