Disputed site in Ayodhya is Ram’s birthplace, high court verdict

Historical Basis Of Ramayana – Lokvani

Ayodhya Verdict: Read the full judgment  Link

High Court of Allahabad: Ram Janmabhoomi Babri Masjid Judgement   Link

Disputed land in Ayodhya Ram’s birthplace, but split it: High Court

Umesh Raghuvanshi & Ajaay Singh, Hindustan Times

Lucknow, September 30, 2010

A three-judge bench of the Allahabad High Court on Thursday ruled that the disputed land in Ayodhya where a makeshift temple was built after razing the Babri mosque in 1992 was Lord Ram’s birthplace. However, it ruled that the land be split among three contesting parties equally.

U Khan, Sudhir Agarwal and D V Sharma delivered a split verdict in 60-year old Ayodhya title suit filed by the Sunni Central Waqf Board. The majority of the bench ruled that the disputed land in Ayodhya was a joint property, held by all the three claimants namely Hindu Mahasabha, Nirmohi Akhara and Sunni Central Waqf Board.

The majority also ruled that the central dome of the disputed structure, where idols of Lord Ram are presently kept in the makeshift temple, be allotted to Hindus. Justice Khan ruled that the mosque was built by Babar, not by demolishing a temple, but on the ruins of a temple.

Justice Sharma categorically rejected the claim of Sunni Central Waqf Board and has ruled that the ‘disputed site is the birth place of Lord Rama’.

However, the entire bench was of the view that the central dome of the disputed structure goes to Hindu Mahasabha, where idols were installed in 1949 and again in 1992 after the demolition of the Babri Mosque. The sita rasoi and ram chabootara have been given to Nirmohi Akhara.

The judges said that none of the litigants would take any action on the land for the next three months.

“We are party disappointed. We will approach the Supreme Court,” Sunni Waqf Board lawyer Zafaryab Jillani told reporters.

Lawyers K N Bhat and Ravi Shankar Prasad, who represented two of the Hindu litigants, announced to reporters that the bench had decided that Lord Ram was born where the Babri mosque was built.

“All the three judges, including S U Khan, are unanimous in accepting that the idol of Ram cannot be removed from the place where it is installed right now,” said lawyer and BJP leader Ravi Shankar Prasad in Lucknow after the court verdict.

The bench invited suggestions from all the parties for demarcation of the land.

The bench delivered the verdict in court no 21, where entry of only 47 persons including the litigants and their counsels was allowed. The High Court had been totally fortified. Uttar Pradesh almost came to a virtual halt at 3.30 p.m., when the historical judgment was being delivered.

WHAT THE JUDGES SAID

Justice S U Khan

“Disputed structure was constructed as mosque by or under orders of Babar. It is not proved by direct evidence that premises in dispute including constructed portion belong to Babar or the person who constructed the mosque. No temple was demolished for constructing the mosque, but it was constructed on the ruins of the temple or some of its material was used in the construction of the mosque.”

Justice Sudhir Agarwal

” It is declared that the area covered by the central dome of the three domed structure, the disputed structure being the deity of Bhagwan Ram Janma Sthan and place of birth of Lord Rama as per faith and belief of the Hindus, belong to plaintiff- Bhagwan Sri Ram Virajman. and shall not be obstructed or interfered in any manner by the defendants, Rajendra Singh and others.”

Justice Dharam Veer Sharma

” The disputed site is the birth place of Lord Rama. Disputed building was constructed by Babar, the year is not certain, but it was built against the tenets of Islam. Thus it cannot have the character of a mosque. The disputed structure was constructed on the site of old structure after demolition of the same. The ASI has proved that the structure was a massive Hindu religious structure. The idols were placed in the middle dome of the disputed structure in the intervening night of 22/23 December 1949.”

History of Ayodhya Temple-Babri Masjid Dispute

History of Ayodhya Temple-Masjid Dispute
Thursday, September 23, 2010

The decades long Ayodhya dispute revolves around the claim over the land in Ayodhya, which is considered scared by Hindus as it is believed to be the birthplace of Lord Ram while Muslims seek to defend the Babri Masjid at the site.

Hindus believe that Ayodhya is the birthplace of Lord Ram, one of the avatars of Lord Vishnu. The land is, therefore, considered sacred and befitting the profile of a holy pilgrimage spot.

The communal tension over the land took root in the construction of the Babri Masji, by Muslim emperor Babur, who in 1527 defeated the Hindu King of Chittorgarh, Rana Sangram Singh at Fatehpur Sikri.

The king left his general, Mir Banki as the Viceroy of the region. Mir Banki, who enforced Mughal rule over the population, came to Ayodhya in 1528 and built the Mosque.

There are claims that when the Mosque built, the Ram temple at Ayodhya was either demolished or modified largely.

Over the years, Hindus have sought to reclaim the ‘Ram Janmabhoomi’ while Muslims have sought to defend the Babri Masjid.

Growth of dispute over the years

According to literature dating back to 1987, before the 1940s the mosque was called Masjid-i Janmasthan (‘mosque on birthplace’) by Indian Muslims

1947 – A Government order prohibited Muslims from being around the site (at least 200 yards). The main gate was locked. However, Hindu pilgrims allowed to enter through a side door.

1984 – The Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) started a campaign to reclaim the site for Hindus so that a temple dedicated to the infant Ram (Ramlala) could be erected.

1989 – Allahabad High Court passed an order that the main gates should be opened up and restored the site to Hindus for eternity.

But the communal discord re-erupted when the Hindus intented to make modifications of the Islamic style structure built by General Mir Banki.

When they inaugurated the proposed new grand Temple with Government permissions, unrest erupted across India as the Muslim community was against this.

This is when Government moved the court, turning the dispute sub-judice

1992 – The dispute took a rather ugly turn on Dec 6, 1992 when the Babri Masjid was demolished during a political rally. This led to riots in which over 2000 were killed.

Ten days after the Babri Masjid demolition, the Liberhan commission was set up to probe the circumstances that led to the demolition.

2003 – On the order of the High Court, the the Archaeological Survey of India carried out excavation at the disputed site of Rama Janmabhumi – Babri Masjid from 12 Mar, 2003 to 7 Aug, 2003. The study reportedly found evidences of an ancient temple.

A 574-page report with maps, drawings as well as opinions was presented before the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad high court in Aug 2003.

Based on the archaeological evidence the the ASI report noted that the remains had distinctive features found associated with the temples of north India and said that there was sufficient proof of existence of a massive and monumental structure having a minimum dimension of 50×30 metres in north-south and east-west directions respectively just below the disputed structure.

2005 – On July 5, 2005, five terrorists attacked the site of the makeshift Ramlalla temple, in Ayodhya.

All the five terrorists were killed in the ensuing gunfight with the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), guarding the area. The attack claimed life of one civilian, who died in a grenade blast that the terrorists triggered to breach a cordon wall.

2009 – In Nov 2009, some of the findings of the Liberhan commission was leaked to the media. These leaked reports indicted Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leaders like LK Advani and Murli Manohar Joshi.

2010 – On Sep 24, 2010, the Allahabad High Court was slated to give its verdict on the Ayodhya title suit on ownership of the disputed land. On the eve of the judgement, the Supreme Court deferred the verdict by a week on a deferment plea and scheduled hearing of the postponement petition on Tuesday, Sep 28.

Some important observations/ chronicles prior to Indian independence:

As early as 1767, Joseph Tieffenthaler, a Jesuit priest, recorded in his French works that were Hindus worshipping and celebrating Ramanavami at the site of the mosque. In 1788, he recorded that Emperor Aurangzeb demolished the fortress called Ramkot to establish a Mahometan temple.

Even till 19th century, there have been chronicles of Hindus worshipping Ram at the Ramkot hill.

P Carnegy wrote in ‘A Historical Sketch of Tehsil Fyzabad’, 1870, “It is said that up to that time (referring to the the Hindu-Muslim clashes in the 1850), the Hindus and Mohamedans alike used to worship in the mosque-temple.

“Since the British rule a railing has been put up to prevent dispute, within which, in the mosque the Mohamedans pray, while outside the fence the Hindus have raised a platform on which they make their offerings.”

While passing an order over the issue in March 1886, the Faizabad District Judge, Col F E A Chamier, observed:

“I visited the land in dispute yesterday in the presence of all parties. I found that the Masjid built by Emperor Babar stands on the border of Ayodhya, that is to say, to the west and south it is clear of habitations. It is most unfortunate that a Masjid should have been built on land specially held sacred by the Hindus, but as that event occurred 356 years ago, it is too late now to agree with the grievances.”

OneIndia News

Mumbai-style Islamic terror plot targeting Europe foiled: Report

Mumbai-style terror plot targeting Europe foiled: Report
Wed, Sep 29

An Al-Qaeda-linked plot to launch a Mumbai-style terror attack simultaneously on London and major cities in France and Germany was disrupted by intelligence agencies, a report has said.

The plan for suicidal onslaughts similar to the 2008 atrocity in Mumbai, where 166 people were killed in a series of gun and grenade assaults was uncovered after a combined operation involving US, UK, France and German intelligence agencies, ‘The Guardian’ reported today quoting officials.

British security and intelligence sources, who have been concerned for some time about the possibility of a Mumbai-style attack in Europe, confirmed that they believed a plot was being hatched by militants based in Pakistan.

The increased rate of US coordinated drone raids along the border with Afghanistan is believed to be a response to intelligence gathered about the plot.

Quoting sources, ‘Sky News’ reported that “militants based in Pakistan were planning simultaneous strikes on London and major cities in France and Germany.”

The plan was in an advanced but not imminent stage and the plotters had been tracked by spy agencies “for some time”.

Intelligence sources told Sky the planned attacks would have been similar to the commando-style raids carried out in Mumbai.

The report said the European plot had been “severely disrupted” following intelligence sharing between Britain, France, Germany and the US. It is not known whether the attackers are already in Europe.

News of the planned strikes came as the Eiffel tower in Paris was evacuated because of a bomb scare for the second time in two weeks.

“It doesn’t necessarily mean it was a target, but it shows how nervous the French are,” the report said.

When the terror plan came to light, US military began helping its European allies by trying to kill the leaders behind the plot in Pakistan’s Waziristan region.

There have been a record 20 missile attacks using drone aircraft there in the past 30 days.

“I am led to believe a number of these attacks were designed against the leadership of this particular plot, which had an al Qaeda and possibly some sort of Taliban connection projecting into Europe,” Sky News foreign editor Tim Marshall said.

Britain’s terror threat level remains at “severe” following the underpants bomber’s attempted attack on Detroit airport last Christmas.

In the aftermath of the attack western intelligence agencies gained access to computers seized from the Islamist group which listed other potential targets outside the Indian subcontinent for commando-style terror strikes.

Nine of the gunmen were killed — but a lone survivor gave Indian investigators a full confession that the assault was planned in Pakistan by Lashkar-e-Toiba, a militant group that originally began an armed campaign against the Indian army in Jammu and Kashmir.

US military briefings suggested the latest missile attacks in Pakistan had been coordinated by the CIA and were an unusual example of using drones to pre-empt possible terror plots.

US plan to bomb 150 terror camps in Pakistan

US ready to bomb 150 Pak terror camps?
Chidanand Rajghatta, TNN, Sep 28, 2010

WASHINGTON: The United States has a secret “retribution” plan to bomb more than 150 terror camps in Pakistan in the event of another major terrorist attack originating from that country.

This startling disclosure about Washington’s “all bets off” policy towards an ostensibly dubious ally in the war on terror is contained in Bob Woodward’s opus ” Obama’s War,” which details an evolving US approach in the region.

The plan pre-dates the Obama presidency, going back to the Bush White House, but elements of policy, aimed at wiping out terrorist sanctuaries in Pakistan, is evident in the current administration’s ruthless bombing by unmanned drones of terrorist targets inside Pakistan, which far surpasses the Bush approach in terms of frequency and intensity.

The US threat also places in context secretary of state Hillary Clinton’s dire warning to Islamabad earlier this year that there would be severe consequences for Pakistan if another 9/11-type attack were traced back to that country.

According to Woodward, then President Bush did not see much difference between 9/11 and 26/11; a foundation of his presidency was zero tolerance for terrorists and their enablers and he was extremely proud of the hard-line doctrine.

Although plans for punitive strikes against Pakistan was initially linked to another 9/11 type attack on US, it evidently evolved after the 26/11 Mumbai carnage, when Bush asked his aides for contingency plans for dealing with Pakistan.

He called his national security team into the Oval Office and told his advisers, “You guys get planning and do what you have to do to prevent a war between Pakistan and India.” The order suggests that the US would undertake the bombing to prevent India from retaliating against Pakistan leading possibly to an all-out war.

“This is like 9/11, he (Bush) said,” Woodward writes. “The United States military did not have “war” plans for an invasion of Pakistan. Instead, it had and continues to have one of the most sensitive and secret of all military contingencies, what military officials call a “retribution” plan in the event of another 9/11-like attack.”

In fact, such is the anger within the US administration about Pakistan’s double-faced approach that the plan calls for a no-holds-barred approach. “Some locations might be outdated, but there would be no concern, under the plan, for who might be living there now. The retribution plan called for a brutal punishing attack on at least 150 or more associated camps,” Woodward writes.

So how did Pakistan escape the wrath of US’ “zero tolerance” policy? According to Woodward, CIA intelligence with 48 hours of the attack showed no direct ISI link. Bush himself called Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to tell him that the new Pakistani government was not involved in the attack.

But the CIA later received reliable intelligence that the ISI was directly involved in the training for Mumbai, Woodward writes in a footnote. ISI chief Ahmed Shuja Pasha flew to Washington later to admit that at least two retired Pakistani army officers who planned the Mumbai attack had ISI links “but this had not been an authorized ISI operation. It was rogue.”

“There may have been people associated with my organization who were associated with this,” Pasha argued. “That’s different from authority, direction and control.” This argument, long attributed to Islamabad’s practice of “plausible deniability” which practicing a policy of state terrorism, saved Pakistan’s bacon.

Woodward’s 417-page book provides a fly-on-the-wall view of the Obama Presidency’s evolving AfPak policy that is more Pak than Af. In an ABC interview, Woodward described how Obama was told of deep problems in the US relationship with Pakistan at his very first intelligence briefing, likening it to a “cold shower” for the President coming just two days after his 2008 presidential victory.

“Imagine the high of being elected on that Tuesday and they come in two days later and say, by the way, here are the secrets, and one of the secrets is Pakistan,” Woodward writes. “We’re attacking with a top-secret, covert operation, the safe havens in Pakistan, but Pakistan is living a lie. And this is a theme throughout the whole Obama presidency: ‘How do you get control of Pakistan?’ ”

Soon after, in an Oval Office meeting with Pakistan’s President Asif Ali Zardari, Obama bluntly tells him his country has to get over its obsession with India. “We do not begrudge you being concerned about India,” Obama tells Zardari, but “we do not want to be part of arming you (Pakistan) against India, so let me be very clear about that.”

Zardari’s response: “We are trying to change our world view but it’s not going to happen overnight.”

From all accounts, Zardari’s attempt to change Pakistan’s chronic pathology towards India has been thwarted by the country’s military, described as a rapacious, over-fed force which fattens itself on an anti-India posture at the expense of the people who pay for it. From exchanges detailed in Woodward’s book, Washington is all too aware of it, but has failed to effect a change in Pakistan’s behaviour despite billions of dollars in aid and a vague threat of retribution.

Majority of Americans have a negative opinion of Islam

U.S. News
Poll: 52 percent in U.S. negative on Islam
Published: Sept. 20, 2010

NEW YORK, Sept. 20 (UPI) — More than half of Americans hold an unfavorable view of Islam and say they consider it to be a religion that encourages violence, a poll indicates.

Americans hold strongly positive views on Christianity but are less approving in their assessment of other religions, the Angus Reid Public Opinion poll has found.

In a survey of 1,024 adults, the poll found 83 percent generally have a favorable view of Christianity while 47 percent feel the same way about Judaism and 43 percent about Buddhism.

But 52 percent of respondents said they hold an unfavorable view of Islam, the poll found.

Asked about religion encouraging violence, 45 percent said they believe Islam encourages violence and 25 percent described it as a peaceful religion.

While 91 per cent of Americans say they have a good basic understanding of the teachings and beliefs of Christianity, less than half are knowledgeable about five other religions: Judaism 43 percent, Islam 34 percent, Buddhism 31 percent, Hinduism 22 percent and Sikhism 8 percent, the poll indicates.

The poll was conducted online on Sept 14 and 15 with a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.

Ahead of Commonwealth Games, suspected Islamic terrorists shoot and injure two tourists near Jama Masjid in Delhi

Gunmen fire at tourist bus in Delhi, wounding 2

By NIRMALA GEORGE, Associated Press Writer Nirmala

Sun Sep 19

NEW DELHI – Two gunmen on a motorcycle opened fire Sunday at a group of tourists near one of India’s biggest mosques, injuring two Taiwanese and raising concerns about security less than two weeks before an international sporting event in the Indian capital.

The gunmen shot randomly at the tourists as they were about to board a bus parked near the Jama Masjid mosque, police spokesman Rajan Bhagat said. The 17th century mosque is a popular tourist destination in the heart of the city.

Police launched a massive search for the gunmen and issued a security alert across the Indian capital.

Hours later, the BBC’s Hindi language service said it received an e-mail purportedly from the Indian Mujahideen, an Islamic militant group, threatening to attack the upcoming Commonwealth Games.

“We know preparations for the games are at their peak. Beware, we too are preparing in full swing for a great surprise,” the e-mail said.

Police cautioned that the e-mail and Sunday’s attack could be unrelated.

“We are investigating the attack on the tourists from all angles,” said Karnail Singh, a joint commissioner of police.

Officials quickly tried to reassure athletes and the public that security in the city was at an unprecedented high. Thousands of athletes from the Commonwealth of Nations are to compete in the games, which are held every four years.

New Delhi’s top elected official, Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit, appealed for calm, declaring the city was safe to host the Oct. 3-14 games in which 71 teams are to take part.

“Please do not panic. An incident like this is something worrying, but nothing to panic about,” Dikshit told reporters.

The secretary-general of the games organizing committee, Lalit Bhanot, said the shooting would have “no impact” on the event.

Indian authorities “have made elaborate arrangements to provide the Commonwealth Games athletes and officials a safe and secure environment,” Bhanot said in a statement.

Federal Home Minister Palaniappan Chidambaram visited the two injured Taiwanese men in the hospital after one was operated on for a stomach wound.

They were in stable condition, said Jaspal Singh, a top police official.

The area around the mosque was cordoned off after the attack and police scoured the densely populated alleys around it. Cars and other vehicles were checked at barriers erected on major roads in the city.

Police said witnesses could give few details about the assailants.

“Eyewitnesses have told us the men were wearing raincoats and helmets. They fired around seven rounds before they sped away,” Karnail Singh said.

The Indian Mujahideen, which has been linked to the banned Pakistan-based Islamist rebel group Lashkar-e-Taiba, was outlawed in June after it was suspected of involvement in an attack on a popular bakery in western India in which 10 people died.

LeT Islamic terrorists using Sri Lanka as base to attack India

US terror alert: Lashkar using Lanka as base to attack India
Pranab Dhal Samanta
Sep 19 2010

Days after it was revealed that German Bakery blast-accused Mirza Himayat Baig allegedly met his Lashkar-e-Toiba contact in Sri Lanka to avoid detection, US agencies have passed on intelligence inputs to India that the LeT already has some 200 cadres present in the island nation who plan to use the country as a “staging ground” to enter India.

It’s learnt that Washington has also informed Colombo about this after Lankan authorities denied that LeT had training facilities there. As per New Delhi’s assessment, the threat could be aggravated if remnants of the LTTE cadre are engaged in logistics for LeT.

Contrary to initial claims that Baig was trained in Sri Lanka, what has been confirmed is that he traveled there in 2008 where he met a contact from LeT. Sources said investigations are on to find out whether he undertook more visits and if LeT operatives are using Sri Lanka as a rendezvous to avoid detection.

According to US inputs, LeT’s 200 cadres in Sri Lanka were possibly “planners and facilitators” currently engaged in laying a network before more operatives can be sent for specific attacks in India. In fact, these inputs suggest that LeT operatives were being specifically trained to be sent to Sri Lanka.

Sources said efforts are on to “sensitise” Lankan authorities at the highest levels to take the threat seriously and help pre-empt any major plans. With India extra cautious along its western coast after 26/11, using Sri Lanka as a staging ground is seen as a “fresh innovation” which can translate into a specific threat with local help.

The US assessment, in fact, suggests that LeT is looking to strengthen its presence in Nepal and Maldives, too. While Nepal has been used to carry out attacks in India, Maldives provides new options if operatives have to reach peninsular India where many “high-value targets” are.

While cautioning against being alarmist about this development, high-level sources said the concern is serious because terror outfits like the LeT seem to have only increased their resources and there is no check on their spread and growth despite the international pressure on Pakistan.

Obama says US not at war with peace loving Islam

US not at war with peace loving Islam, says Obama
September 11, 2010

On the eve of the ninth anniversary of the 9/11, President Barack Obama said that America is not at war with Islam, but against “a handful of tiny minority” who have distorted the preachings of this great religion.

Asserting that the majority of the Muslims across the world are peace loving and do not support extremist ideologies, Obama said the US is at war with terrorists and murderers who had perverted Islam.

“We were at war with terrorists and murderers who had perverted Islam, had stolen its banner to carry out their outrageous acts,” Obama said in response to a question at his White House press conference on Friday.

“We are not at war against Islam. We are at war against terrorist organisations that have distorted Islam or falsely used the banner of Islam to engage in their destructive acts. He underlined the need for allies to successfully reduce the terror threat.

“We’ve got to be clear about that, because…if we’re going to successfully reduce the terror threat, then we need all the allies we can get,” Obama said. “The folks who are most interested in a war between the United States or the West and Islam are al-Qaeda. That’s what they’ve been banking on,” he said.

He said the overwhelming majority of Muslims around the world are peace-loving and interested in the same things that “you and I are interested in. How do I make sure I can get a good job, how can I make sure that my kids get a decent education, how can I make sure I’m safe, how can I improve my lot in life.”

“And so they have rejected this violent ideology for the most part, overwhelmingly,” Obama said. He said it was necessary to be clear about “who the enemy is here”.

“So from a national security interest, we want to be clear about who the enemy is here. It’s a handful, a tiny minority of people who are engaging in horrific acts and have killed Muslims more than anybody else,” Obama said.

In fact, Obama praised his predecessor, George W Bush, in this regard. “One of the things that I most admired about President Bush was, after 9/11, him being crystal clear about the fact that we were not at war with Islam,” he said.

“We were at war with terrorists and murderers who had perverted Islam, had stolen its banner to carry out their outrageous acts,” Obama noted.

Obama said the country stands “together against those who would try to do us harm”.

“I was so proud of the country rallying around that idea, that notion: that we are not going to be divided by religion; we’re not going to be divided by ethnicity; we are all Americans; we stand together against those who would try to do us harm,” the President told the American people.

“That’s what the US has done over the last nine years. We should take great pride in that,” he said. He said it is absolutely important for the American people to know who our enemies are.

“Our enemies are al-Qaeda and their allies, who are trying to kill us but have killed more Muslims than just about anybody on Earth,” Obama said. The US President said it is important for the Americans to remember the large Muslim population in the country.

“They’re going to school with our kids. They’re our neighbours. They’re our friends. They’re our co-workers,” he said, adding “I’ve got Muslims who are fighting in Afghanistan, in the uniform of the United States armed services”.

“And we’ve got to make sure that we are crystal clear for our sakes and their sakes: They are Americans. And we honour their service,” Obama said, adding “Part of honouring their service is making sure that they understand that we don’t differentiate between ‘them’ and ‘us'”.

Lalit K Jha in Washington
© Copyright 2010 PTI. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of PTI content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent.

Sultan Shahin takes on Muslim fundamentalists through his website newageislam.com

Publication: The Crest Mumbai; Date: May 1, 2010; Section: Profile; Page: 32
Via epaper.timesofindia.com

‘I fight petrodollar Islam’

Virtual warrior Sultan Shahin takes on Muslim fundamentalists through his website newageislam.com

MOHAMMED WAJIHUDDIN TIMES NEWS NETWORK

In a tiny room in East Delhi’s Patparganj, a man spends most of his waking hours at his computer. This passion may be something he shares with millions, but Sultan Shahin is no ordinary web addict. Behind his constant surfing, writing and posting pieces on his website called newageislam.com is a steadfast purpose: to reclaim Islam from the clutches of jihadists and petrodollarfunded Salafist-Wahhabis.

Shahin, who ideologically fights the religious right — the tyrannical Taliban and its sympathisers as well as the many Islamic supremacists who claim that Islam alone is Allah’s chosen path to paradise — is a spirited web warrior. “My fight is against petrodollar Islam,” he declares. “I am creating a forum that will lead us to the understanding of a pluralistic, inclusive, tolerant Islam.” And Islam, he adds, is not a new religion. “The Quran says this. It is a reiteration and revalidation of earlier religions,” he avers, seated at his study stacked with scholarly tomes, including several copies of the commentaries on the Quran.

Anathema as this may be to fundamentalists, it’s won Shahin many followers. In the mere two years since the inception of newageislam.com, the website has 117,000 registered subscribers (subscription is free), claims its 60-year-old editor. Its daily newsletter, brought out by a skeletal staff of five, has carried debates on issues and personalities seldom talked about among mosque-going, visibly pious Muslims. So the Mumbai-based Muslim televangelist Dr Zakir Naik is slammed, not because he is allegedly funded by the petro-rich Saudi Sheikhs, but because he tries to establish the supremacy of Islam over all other religions. Niyaz Fatehpuri, a 20th-century Indian scholar and editor of Urdu periodical Nigaar, has become a much admired man on the website because of his rational, ingenious interpretation of Islamic principles. The website even follows the Urdu press, including Urdu dailies in Pakistan, and uploads the rational views in it, both in their original Urdu and English translations.

The feedback, says Shahin, has been astounding. “When I launched it, I didn’t realise it would generate so much interest, especially in young Muslims, from Australia to Abu Dhabi and Canada to Coimbatore,” explains the journalist who, ironically, began his career way back in the 1970s at the conservative Jamaat-e-Islami’s mouthpiece weekly Radiance, then based in the bylanes of Ballimaran in Old Delhi.

Son of a maulvi, Shahin grew up in a village in the backwaters of Aurangabad in Bihar, and remembers the many nights, he, along with his five siblings, went to bed hungry as his father fell ill and later died, leaving the responsibility of supporting the family on Shahin’s young shoulders. While studying in a college in Patna, he worked part-time for a couple of local Urdu dailies. Shahin later landed up in London as editor of Asia Times, a weekly owned by one Arif Ali of Indian origin. A decade or so in England, he says, gave him great experience “as it exposed me to different strains of Islam and Muslims”. Like, once at a friend’s house in Nottingham, he heard a 20-year-old Muslim extolling the virtues of Ahle Hadees, a sect which propagates puritanical Islam. Shahin asked the boy the treatment he would prescribe for those Muslims who didn’t follow the Ahle Hadees sect. “Kill them,” said the young fanatic in a cold-blooded tone. “It really disturbed me. The boy had apparently been influenced by radical organisations like Al Mujahidun and Hizbul Tehrir. Thousands of young Muslims had been brainwashed by incendiary preacher Omar Bakri who commanded the following that saints do,” recalls Shahin. “I knew it would not take long before the fires of fanatic Islam reached the Indian subcontinent and consumed our youth.”

Shahin personally encountered the ugly face of exclusivist, supremacist Wahhabism in India when he left the London job to edit a magazine in Delhi in the 1990s, backed by a group of influential, educated, “enlightened” Muslims. A few months into his new job, over breakfast one morning, a member of the management asked him a strange question: “You have been married to a Hindu (Pragya) for a decade. Why have you not been able to bring her under the fold of Islam?” “I quoted him the Quranic verse La iqra fideen (there is no compulsion in religion) and reasoned that to convert or not to Islam was her personal choice. But it didn’t cut any ice and they sacked me,” Shahin says.

He went into deep depression, as the blow had been dealt by the people whom he believed to be “the cream of Indian Muslim society”. He took to freelancing aggressively in the national press, opposing the conservative mindset, a mentality which threatened the multicultural, pluralistic ethos of India and Indian Islam. Many in the Sangh Parivar, including the BJP, mistook him for the right medium to reach out to Muslims. “They didn’t know that many Muslims hated me. I was a bad choice to become a bridge between the Sangh Parivar and Muslims,” laughs Shahin, who has been variously addressed as kafir (infidel), munafiq (hypocrite) and even Dear Zionist.

His liberal, rational advocacy of Islamic principles, especially since he launched the website, has enraged many Islamists, who hack his website regularly and post abusive letters and rejoinders. Many threaten him with the fires of hell. “Initially, I left the site unmonitored, as I wanted a free and frank dialogue. But now we monitor it, as we discovered that not just the jihadists, but even some Viagra-selling companies were using the website to advertise their products,” he smiles. “We sell ideas, not aphrodisiacs.”

A father of four, Shahin’s deep study of religions, especially Islam, has made him conclude that like Adam, Moses and Mohammad, Ram and Krishna were also prophets. “If we address Mohammad as Hazrat Mohammad, I have no reservations about addressing Ram as Hazrat Ram,” he explains.

As we leave this champion of rational, inclusive Islam, we marvel at India’s generous secularism. Which Islamic country would have tolerated a Shahin? Ask Salman Rushdie or Taslima Nasreen.

Historic 9/11 Rally against Islamic Terrorism draws tens of thousands

Historic 9/11 Rally against Islamic Terrorism draws tens of thousands

Photos, videos

via atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com