Tuesday, November 19, 2013

For those who wish to take a second wife: Moulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi (RA) wed twice. From the first wife he had no children. He married second time with a widow who brought with herself a daughter. Hence the Moulana had no biological son or real daughter of his own. Once, a murid brought two melons, identical in color and size, for him. The Moulana asked for a paring knife and when he had it he cut both melons in half in half and asked his nephew and secretary Moulana Shabbir Ali to give half piece of each melon to his one wife and the remaining two pieces (from the two fruits) to the second one. One of the disciples present asked him "But Moulana you could have sent one melon each to your wives instead. Why did you choose to cut them half in half?" The Moulana replied Islam does not allow any discrimination between the wives or between their children. What if they (melons) tasted different". No sermon intended, just for your information.

P.S. : P.S. : “But if you fear that you willl not be able to deal justly (with your wives), then (marry) only one…(Al-Quran: Surah al-Nisa, 3)

Tuesday, November 5, 2013

Geelani release: Opp. smells ploy http://epaper.asianage.com/PUBLICATIONS/ASIAN/AAGE/2013/11/05/ArticleHtmls/Geelani-release-Opp-smells-ploy-05112013004038.shtml?Mode=1

YUSUF JAMEEL
SRINAGAR
Oct. 4: Syed Ali Shah Geelani was released from a 235-day-old home confinement last week when the police contingent deployed outside his Srinagar residence was withdrawn and a makeshift security camp to enforce ‘house arrest’ orders on him disappeared all night. The octogenarian leader is currently touring various parts of Kashmir Valley to reconnect with the people with his long-standing viewpoint “elections held under the framework of Indian Constitution aren’t and can’t be substitute to the promised right to self-determination.”
The campaign was picked up from his hometown Sopore on last Friday, an auspicious day for Muslims, and apparently with the purpose of making his perspective stronger and leave no illusion in anybody’s mind he also chose to visit the family of Parliament attack convict Muhammad Afzal Guru, hanged in Tihar jail earlier this year, and reiterated “India may delay freedom to the people of Kashmir but can’t deny it.” He was even sure of the delay being only “fleeting” and pledged this in front of Guru’s teenage son Ghalib.
While Geelani is out and seizing his ostensible freedom to convince more and more people on “futility of elections” mantra, a new political controversy surrounding his ‘release’ has set off in Jammu and Kashmir, bringing various mainstream political parties and leaders nose to nose. Several opposition politicians have openly accused the ruling National Conference-Congress coalition of “manipulating” Geelani’s release to keep voters away from polling booths. “He has been released only to ensure he reaches out the people with his election boycott call as they know it for sure that he will find many takers,” alleged Abdur Rashid Kabuli, former MP who is part of a recently launched ‘Third Front’ in Jammu and Kashmir comprising communist parties and some regional groups to fight the forthcoming State Assembly and Lok Sabha elections “collectively and coherently.”
Kabuli is concerned that a low turnout will only facilitate “vote chori” and “it is anybody’s guess who will do it or benefit from it.” He said, “It has happened in the past and it may happen again.” Some other political parties also have questioned timing of ending Geelani’s home confinement and said it could be a ploy. There has been no reaction to the criticism by the government nor has it, so far, given explanation as to why it suddenly decided to release the separatist leader and allow him to move from place to place with his election boycott diktat.
Some officials, however, privately say that keeping Geelani under house arrest for so long was only inviting severe criticism from human rights groups within the country and abroad and recently several newspapers having international sway also wrote about it. Also, the J&K High Court had recently reserved verdict on a contempt plea filed by Geelani seeking action against the authorities for non-compliance of court directions on his house arrest. The government’s counsel had informed the Court that the Srinagar District Magistrate had passed a fresh order on April 20 against Geelani under Section 144 and pleaded that police deployed outside his residence he “is meant for his protection.”
Nevertheless, what has mystified local watchers is; some ruling coalition politicians including senior NC leader and minister for Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Ali Muhammad Sagar, who would until recently denounce Geelani and every action that he would take, publicly acknowledged his leadership “qualities” and even called him a “mass leader”. While Kabuli has urged Geelani to reconsider his poll boycott call, Moulvi Abbas Ansari, a senior separatist leader from the so-called moderate faction of Hurriyat Conference, has hoped his “freedom” would not be transitory and that he would not leave any room for maneuvering by anybody.  All said, Geelani is pulling huge crowds wherever he goes but will the people oblige him also when the elections to the State Assembly and Parliament (sometime next year) are held or the separatists’ poll boycott call will once again fall short or evoke encouraging response only in few cities and towns as did happen on several occasions in the past is to be seen than speculated.

Meanwhile, Chief Minister Omar Abdullah said on Monday Geelani's release was not a political but administrative decision. "Geelani was released after administration took pros and cons into account and finally decided to release him.” He added that the past record shows wherever Geelani addresses people, violence breaks out there. “Despite the negative past record, the administration let him go,” he said. He also said, "People are the ultimate source of authority and it is the people who can judge the best.” 

He, however, hastened to add, "Geelani remains in lime light during disturbance and everyone that time feels and thinks the he is the leader of people. As peace prevails, people forget him." Before Abdullah same is the case with mainstream leaders. "People forget them during disruption of peace but revolve around them in the times of peace.”

Friday, March 1, 2013

Excerpts of an interview that I gave to a New Delhi-based journalist recently :



Q: Do you think self-censorship is because of fear or because of the growth of an artist?

A: I think, in many cases, if not all, it is because of the growth of an artist. A stage comes in his/her professional life when he/she can make a distinction between right and wrong. When I say wrong, it may not be wrong as such but distribution of which will do harm than any good to people, the society and, on larger scale, the humanity.

Q: Is self-censorship good for an artist? How?

A: I’m a professional journalist. As such I would never like to write anything that would set out a riot. I’m just giving you an example; that in the sub-continental context. But I personally believe that on the issues where you need to educate people or change a mindset such as on Kashmir a journalist must put things on paper or report about them as they are. Nothing should be suppressed in the name of national interest. Worse is when some of us try to hide things from our readers, listeners or viewers because of personal likes or dislikes and even on the basis of one’s own political or religious beliefs. I’m saying that because I’ve seen it happening around. And that is criminal. It can’t be called self-censorship as the doers wish to believe it is.

Q: Do you think if you perform your art freely, government or groups will find it controversial?
A: Yes, in certain cases. Precisely, when it hurts or is seen as being harmful to someone’s interests; collective or individual. It becomes controversial mainly when it clashes with your political views; tells the people that you are wrong what you believe in or are doing. During the heyday of insurgency in Kashmir, I would be openly accused by the government, the security forces of being hand in glove with militants. On the other hand, various militant outfits would complain my reports don’t tell the truth fully, am not giving due coverage to what they are doing or may have done, etc. Then a stage came when all parties to the dispute began calling me biased in favour of their rivals. Why? Because I was trying to perform my art freely.

Q: How has censorship changed you?

A: It has not changed me as such but made me professionally more mature and more responsible.

Q: Have there been instances where you have self-censored your work?

A: Yes, there have been such instances there. In most of these it was rather being responsible. When Rajiv Gandhi was assassinated I received a phone call and the caller introduced himself as spokesperson of a Kashmiri militant outfit and claimed they had killed Rajiv Gandhi. I entered into an argument with the caller, asked him to establish his identity-that he was a genuine guy authorized to speak for that particular organisation. He failed to given convincing answers to the questions I asked him. Yet the story would have made headline on international level. Those days, I was working also for an international news agency. But I knew what it would mean for Kashmiris living or working in various parts of India if I only say that someone who claimed to be speaking on behalf of a Kashmiri militant outfit admitted to killing Rajiv Gandhi. I knew what had happened to Sikhs in Delhi and some other parts of India following Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was murdered by her Sikh bodyguards. I decided not to report what the caller had said and prepared myself to face the outfit’s ire. Later I learnt he was a fake guy. Now imagine what would have been the purpose of or motive behind his telling me what he actually said.
Q: Do you think it necessary?

A: Yes. It becomes necessary when something very critical is involved. I gave you instances why.

Q: Is absolute writing freedom possible? Where do you draw the line?

A: It is possible provided you are also ready to face the consequences. I won’t say where do I draw the line but my experience is in Indian media is; many editors and owners have drawn a line-a sort of Lakshman Rekha-on issues and regions such as Kashmir which they hardly do cross.

Q: How important is the right to offend to a literary culture. Is it necessary?

A: I don’t think I will be able to answer this question. That because it depends on the kind of situation you are caught in as an artist. You cross the bridge when you actually come to it.

Saturday, February 16, 2013

And they wait for his mortal remains now.


YUSUF JAMEEL

SRINAGAR

Feb. 9, 2013: “Allah must have thought good for us. I’m optimistic,” Tabbasum, wife of Muhammad Afzal Guru, had said recently.

Speaking to this newspaper at Gurus’ ancestral house built of exposed burnt brick and timber and situated on the banks of River Jhelum at Jagir, a Sopore suburb, 55-km northwest of Srinagar, she had said that however conflicting reports about Guru’s providence pouring out of New Delhi turn her and other family members nervous from time to time. “Those who ask for immediate hanging of Afzal make us anxious. We know why they do that but they, perhaps, don’t realize how painful it is for us particularly our 12-year-old son Ghalib,” she had said.

“When something about his father appears in a newspaper and he hears about that from his schoolmates the first thing he asks for on returning home is to show him the publication. He also wishes to keep himself abreast of news about his father through Internet," she had said

Whenever he would find something discouraging he would look sad. "That makes me cry,” Tabbasum who works as a manager at a private nursing home in neighbouring Baramulla had said.  Some time ago, Ghalib after watching TV rushed to his mother to tell her Bollywood actor Shah Rukh Khan has “supported” his father’s situation. “He was excited saying SRK was the only person who spoke in support of his father in a discussion on TV,” his mother recalled.

“I earn sufficiently to keep ourselves going and meet the expenses on Ghalib’s education but Afzal’s absence makes life dark and incomplete.  I’m still learning to live without him. In fact, it is his (Afzal’s) prayers and my love and concern for our child that encourage me to live for them. I’m sure he will come back someday,” the 32-year-old Tabbasum had said.

Afzal is also her cousin and they tied in nuptial knot on November 1, 1998. It was an arranged marriage decided by the two families. Afzal was an MBBS student but had left his studies midway to “fight for the freedom of Kashmir.” The family would make no bones about his being a Pakistan-trained militant. Rather it feels “proud” about him being a “dedicated soldier” of Kashmir’s “freedom struggle”. 

Aijaz Ahmed Guru, Afzal’s brother, said “I know him so well, better than his wife. He is a brother and has been a friend too. His love for his people is infinite. He is worried about their future and would often express himself before me and other friends. He wanted to see Kashmir liberated from foreign occupation and was prepared to sacrifice his life for the cause. I know that for certain.”

Asked if he felt Afzal was implicated in the Parliament attack case and that any link between him and the terrorists was only tenuous as some people insist, Aijaz had said, “Let us think what prosecution said is true. Also, to accept he was involved in the incident or he was not is immaterial now.  As far as I know he is a Pakistan-trained mujahid who had devoted his life for the cause of freedom. If that was not the case, then he would not have relinquished his studies midway and joined the militants’ ranks.”

Tabbasum had wished and prayed the President commuted Afzal’s death sentence to life imprisonment. “After every nimaz and other times also I pray to Allah that a decision that comes out is good for us. I seek His blessings for Afzal.” Yet the fact that his mercy petition remained undecided for so long was “agonising” for the entire family, Aijaz had said. Their mother, Aisha, died in last week of September, 2012. “Doctors said she died of gastric stomach cancer but we know what the real cause off her illness was,” Tabbasum had said.
 

The family had also said it had no love last for politicians who throng their place or/ and issue statements in support of Afzal whenever he is in news. “Apart from statements they have done nothing. No real legal aid for Afzal has come from any side. But we take everything in our stride. We don’t complain nor would you find us lamenting in public because we have no political ambition. We are simple people, work hard to earn our livelihood and thank God for the good and bad things that happen in our lives,” Aijaz had asserted.

He denied Afzal, the militant, had ever surrendered before the BSF in Kashmir in late 1990s. “He had brought two guns from Pakistan. One of them actually meant for another boy had been concealed in sand on the riverbank. Since the security forces would frequently raid our place and ask for the weapon I retrieved the gun and took it to the BSF and handed it over to them against proper receipt on behalf of Afzal.” The rumour had it ‘Afzal has along with his weapon surrendered before the BSF’.       

Thursday, January 10, 2013

LoC skirmishes: India unlikely to accept UNMOGIP role

YUSUF JAMEEL SRINAGAR Jan. 9: If Pakistan’s offer that the recent combats along the Line of Control (LoC) in Jammu and Kashmir may be investigated by the United Nations Military Observers’ Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP) is conceded by New Delhi, the 39-member group will, at least, undergo some toil after years of seclusion actually forced by it (India). It will also restore its legitimacy fully as India has sought to keep it at arm's length ever since the 'Ceasefire Line' in Kashmir was re-designated as the "Line of Control" following the Simla Agreement of 1972. Hence, it is unlikely that India will even agree to give any kind of consideration to the Pakistani suggestion of involving the UNMOGIP into any kind of probe into the alleged, and since refuted, ceasefire violations and intrusions along the de facto border by either side. After the UN Security Council enforced ceasefire between India and Pakistan in Kashmir in January 1949, the two countries signed Karachi Agreement in March 1951 and established a ceasefire line to be supervised by observers. The same year, after the termination of the UNCIP, the Security Council passed a resolution (91-1951) under which UNMOGIP was established to observe and report violations of ceasefire. However, after the signing of the Simla pact, India and Pakistan disagree on UNMOGIP’s mandate in Kashmir. India argues that the mandate of UNMOGIP has lapsed after Simla agreement because it was specifically established to observe ceasefire according to Karachi Agreement, the assertion questioned by Pakistan. The military authorities of the neighbouring country have continued to lodge complaints about alleged ceasefire violations along the LoC with UNMOGIP. On the other hand, India has lodged no such complaints with it since January 1972 and has restricted the military observers on its side of the de facto border yet have continued to provide accommodation, security, transport and other facilities to UNMOGIP. However, the UN Secretary General’s office maintains that the UNMOGIP should continue to function because no resolution has been passed to terminate it. If India moves such a resolution in the UN Security Council, directly or through an ally member, it would only bring the issue of Kashmir back to the limelight at International level which India will never want to, say the Kashmir watchers. Nevertheless, the LoC only refers to the military control line between India and Pakistan in Kashmir and does not constitute a legally recognized international boundary but is the de facto border. However, voices are being raised both in India and Pakistan and at International level to make it a permanent border between the two countries. India has constructed a 12-feet high double-row of fencing and concertina wire along a 550 km portion of the 740 km long LoC which is electrified and connected to a network of motion sensors, thermal imaging devices, lighting systems and alarms in order to discourage infiltration from across the de facto border. Indian army says that it has, in fact, reduced by eighty percent the number of militants and other “undesirable elements” who cross into its side of the LoC to carry out subversive activities. Islamabad has resented the construction of the barrier, saying it violates both bilateral accords and relevant UN Security Council resolutions. At present, the UNMOGIP has 39 military observers drawn from Chile, Croatia, Finland, Italy, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Sweden, Thailand and Uruguay, 25 international civilian personnel and 48 local civilian staff. It operates from Srinagar in summer and Rawalpindi in winter but has regional offices at various places across Jammu and Kashmir including Jammu, Poonch, Muzaffarabad and Mirpur and the costs which are US $21,084,900 (2012-13) are met directly under the UN regular budget. Meanwhile, the UNMOGIP has received an official complaint from the Pakistan army and will conduct a probe into the ceasefire violations on the LoC. "Regarding the January 6 alleged incident, the UNMOGIP has received an official complaint from the Pakistan army and will conduct an investigation as soon as possible in accordance with its mandate," Martin Nesirky, spokesman for Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, was quoted as saying at a press briefing in New York.