Sunday, 29 November 2015

The comments of Azam Khan & Mani Shankar Aiyer on Paris attack are anything but secular!!

Sometimes I feel that the 'Indian secular industry' must be acknowledged as the eighth wonder of the world because of its inexplicable logics. When International Yoga Day was celebrated in 177 countries including Muslim countries which follow Shariat laws, Indian secular industry defined Yoga as a Hindu practice which can't be imposed on Indian Muslims. To explain further they said that both Om and Surya Namaskar are anti-Muslim. Om in fact is considered as a sacred sound, mostly meaning an affirmation or acknowledgement. In some cases it's defined as 'Atman' and' inner soul of self'.

Not going into details, it can be said that people also bear their name as 'Om'. Thus calling a particular person by his name Om (for example Om Prakash) is not imposition of Hindu practice but using it in Yoga becomes communal. Similarly what does 'Surya Namaskar' mean? On translation in Islamic terms it means 'Salaam to the Sun'. However the Indian secular industry termed it as one of the worshipping rituals of Hindus.

The above expression of mine is a personal observation on how Indian secular industry tries to play divisive role in alienating the Indian minority community from the majority community, stoking wrong interpretations just for petty vote bank politics. But this time they have gone beyond limits justifying even terror. UP cabinet minister Azam Khan described the Paris attack as a reaction to an action, where as Mani Shankar Aiyar justified the Paris terror attack saying that the western countries must end Islam-phobia.

What it means? Aren't both playing obnoxiously to the gallery of Indian Muslims, provoking them to take up arms in case they feel that they are being discriminated? Aren't indirectly they justifying all the terrorist acts inside as well as outside India? Both Mani Shankar Aiyar and Azam Khan are habitual offenders. Aiyar was earlier too involved in commenting over the Charlie Hebdo terror act, citing it as a backlash by the Muslim community.

Indian Muslims totally reject terror acts, be it from ISIS or from any other organization. Notable Muslim scholars' time and again have appeared in press and TV studios reiterating that Islam is a religion of peace and it doesn't endorse terrorism of any kind. India is home to around 18 crore Muslims, but are the least radicalized community compared to other nations. There are some radical youths who have joined different terror groups, but then such radical/fringe thinking can be found across all religions and communities. No religion or community endorses such fringe elements.

Since 1947 both Hindu and Muslim communities have clashed with each other in several riots (all are in fact due to political conspiracies) yet both communities took ample steps not to radicalize their youth. That's why India has a special status in the world.

Mani Shankar Aiyar and Azam Khan should refrain from behaving like fringe elements that exist in both communities, because one of them is a former union minister and another is a present cabinet minister of largest state of India.

So, should they be featuring on the same page as Owaisi, Sakshi Maharaj, Yogi Adityanath, Sadhvi Prachi, or Akbaruddin? Will the Congress and Samajwadi Party take action against them or simply ignore it by just distancing themselves from their comments in the name of self defined secularism? If yes, then on what ground can they question the BJP for the outrageous remarks of their motor mouth fringe mindset leaders?

No comments:

Post a Comment