DELIBERATELY DISTORTED SECULARISM IN INDIA , AMENDING OUTDATED MUSLIM PERSONAL LAWS , SHARIA LAW , SHAH BANO CASE , DHARMENDRA HEMA MALINI CASE , BODMAS - CAPT AJIT VADAKAYIL
During my travels over 4 decades to Islamic countires I have asked hundreds of Muslim men .
Why do you circumcise your dick ?
All of them said because it is mentioned in the Koran.
When I tell them that I too have read the Koran and there is nothing mentioned in Koran about circumcision, they try to argue and then keep quiet with a confused look.
Khitan or circumcision is only mentioned in the Hadith — which also includes circumcision, removing pubic hair, clipping the mustache, paring the nails, and plucking the hair under the armpits.
How many percentage Muslims do you see around the world with shaved upperlips?
The Five Pillars of the Islamic Faith are - the profession of faith, daily prayer, fasting at Ramadan, giving money to the poor (charity), and the pilgrimage to Mecca.
Muhammad the Prophet was a very intelligent person, and he created laws for the survival of a “not so bright” desert Bedouin community.
He made several laws which even the most learned of Muslims do NOT know the reason why?
I am a Hindu and NOT a Muslim.
From now on this post if for educated Muslims who are Indians first. This post is NOT for people who are Muslims first and then desh drohi Pakistanis.
I am sure NO educated or uneducated Muslim wants his respected mother, dear sister or darling daughter to be divorced by a man gone astray, just by saying TALAQ TALAQ TALAQ.
Or a Hindu man like Dharmendra converting to Islam just because he wants to marry Hema Malini who is more attractive than his first wife , without divorcing her.
Punch into Google search-
CULTURAL WISDOM VADAKAYIL
Yes, taking four wives had a social engineering purpose in those days .
Now , punch into Google search-
OF PORK AND PIGS VADAKAYIL
Like Muslims , Hindus and Jews too do NOT eat pork.
Ever since the Babri Masjid demolition even good desh bhakt Muslims see a conspiracy when a Hindu talks about amending Muslims personal laws, to be congruent with the times.
Yes, India is a secular country. SECULAR means treating all religions the same. Secular does NOT mean that you kick the majority and pamper the minority in a selfish manner for votes.
Muslims do NOT understand why Hindus demolished the Babri Masjid. I am NOT a supporter of this demolition. But it has happened and there is NO point crying over it. Moreover no namaz prayers have ever been conducted in this structure, since it was built — never mind the SP propaganda.
Imagine Israel in all its arrogant power, bombs Kaaba in Mecca and then uses the same stones to build a synagogue on top of the existing foundation. And after 400 years the Muslims of Saudi Arabia are in a condition where they can undo a past wrong, will they not do it?
Same way, Ayodhya for Hindus is like Mecca.
Thought the waitress and her coterie has kicked Hindus on their ehads and tried to prove that Lord Rama and Ayodhya is just fiction , the rest of the world does NOT think so.
Before 7000 BC India ruled the whole world.
South Korean tourist come in droves to visit Ayodhya and their government also wanted to ADOPT Ayodhya, which we did NOT permit.
Punch into google search-
THE KOREAN BRAHMINS, KIM HEO CLAN VADAKAYIL
and
BABRI MASJID DEMOLITION VADAKAYIL
We cannot have different rules in India for different communities. We recollect the incident where Simranjit Singh Mann wanted to enter parliament with his sword. If so Coorgis can carry guns into parliament.
If so if we can convert to an Australian aborginee community and can welcome each other by shaking their pricks instead of hands. Or we can convert ourselves to Eskimos and do wife swapping merrily. Or we convert to some Bantu tribe and carry bows and arrows into airplanes.
Finally is this not what Dharmendra and Hema Malini has done?
How valid is Dharmendra’s seat in Lok Sabha and Hema Malini’s seat in Rajya Sabha when their entry forms itself are a big lie. Why have we allowed false hood and chicanery to penetrate the Indian Parliament.
How valid is Hema Malini’s daughter’s marriage ?
How many of you can feel the mental agony of Prakash Kaur?
Check out their case.
Hema Malini fell in love with her co-star Dharmendra during the filming of Sholay. She eventually kicked his wife Prakash Kaur on her head and married him. Prakash Kaur did NOT divorce her husband Dharmendra.
Before Dharmendra and Hema Malinin married, they both converted to Islam, though the conversion was for convenience only for Hindus are not allowed second marriage. Their marriage was solemnised on 21 August 1979 in Bombay in accordance with Islamic rites.
While filing his nomination papers as a BJP candidate before the returning officer, Dharmendra had written his name as Deol Dharmendra Kewal Krishn concealing his Muslim name Dilawar Khan and wrote the name of his first wife Prakash Kaur in the respective column.
When his political rivals brought the issue to the notice of election authorities and the general public, Dharmendra lied through his teeth and denied his conversion to Islam and change of name.
Lies in the affidavit submitted on oath to the returning officer -- is this what is expected out of an MP? BJP must sack Dharmendra and deny him a party ticket. Sections 420 (cheating), infringement of the Hindu Marriage Act and Islamic Shariat law must be applied on both Dharmendra and Hema Malini and their properties must NOT pass on to their children..
Hema Malini too has concealed her name vide her marital status in her Rajya Sabha form. Both of them have taken refuge in the political spectrum—it is NOT that both are so found of the fish market known as the Indian Parliament .
The magazine Outlook published a photocopy of his Nikahnama (marriage document) which clearly said that Dilawar Khan Kewal Krishn (44 years) accepted Aisha Bi R. Chakravarty (29 years) as his wife on 21 August 1979 at a mehr of, Rs 111,000 in the presence of two legal witnesses…’ The nikah was solemnised by Maulana Qazi Abu Talha Misbahi Faizabadi. .
Both the nikahnama and the affidavit before the returning officer state his address as Plot number 22, Road Number 11 J.V.P.D. Scheme, Juhu, Mumbai—400049. The nikahnama also carries details of the maulvi and eyewitnesses present on the occasion. A mehr of Rs 1,11,000 too is shown to have been finalised between the two parties as the agreement for the nikah.
In an interview to Outlook , Dharmendra lied again and categorically denied he had changed his religion. "This allegation is totally incorrect. I am not the kind of man who will change his religion to suit his interests." When asked about the Congress charges, he had asserted: "If there is any truth in this charge, let someone prove it with evidence. If this a lie, let the public decide."
What do you mean let the public decide. It is the Indian judiciary who will decide if CHAAR SAU BISI has been done.
Polygamy is illegal in India for Hindus and other religious groups under the Hindu Marriage Act. It remains legal for Muslims under the terms of The Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act of 1937, as interpreted by the All India Muslim Personal Law Board.
And who are all these Muslim mullahs and stalwarts who interpret the Muslims personal laws. Are they elected in a fair manner ? It is because of these hardliners who re-interpret the Hadith as they please, that Islam as a religion is put in bad light.
Why are we being selective?
Why do we have selective Islamic laws?
Koran wants the hand of a Muslim thief to be cut off .
If we can afford a Muslim TALAQ privelage why NOT a chopped off hand?
In future if any Muslim man with 4 wives steals-- let his hands be chopped off. Why cherry pick Sharia rules selectively for selfish advantage.
In future if any Muslim man with 4 wives steals-- let his hands be chopped off. Why cherry pick Sharia rules selectively for selfish advantage.
Narendra Modi, the BJP Prime Ministerial candidate of the BJP started his poll campaign, calling for a Uniform Civil Code. India has two sets of Laws, General law and Personal Law.
General law is applicable to all the persons who approach the Courts like the Criminal laws including the Indian Penal Code and procedural laws like the Civil Procedure Code, the Criminal Procedure Code and the Indian Evidence Act.
Personal laws are special laws applicable to the persons in their private family affairs like Marriage, Divorce, Adoption, Inheritance, Wills, Guardianship etc.
The Legislature has not interfered in the personal laws applicable to persons following their religion or the established customs and traditions.
Allah does NOT distinguish between men and women. The self proclaimed Islamic clerics are ignorant about what the Koran has to say on the subject of women’s lives. The unelected Muslim Personal Law Board is not representative of all Muslims, as they have very few educated women in their organization.
Muhammed the prophet introduced reformist Islam and Koran to uplift women. It was NOT his intention to kick Muslim women on their heads. Koran promotes gender equality gave women the right to divorce, re-marry, and work.
Muslim women like Shah Bano have NOT argued against the Koran . Rather, they only plead for their rights under Koran. Shah Bano was an old Indian Muslim lady then in her seventies, now deceased, whose affluent lawyer husband famously deserted her for a younger attractive woman and then sought to rely on traditional Muslim law to refuse any further responsibility for her welfare.
Shah Bano was kicked out by her husband after 4 decades of marriage and several children. He claimed that giving his old former wife the stipulated iddat money and the dower (haq mahr), together just a few hundred Indian Rupees, fulfilled his legal obligations towards her, relying on traditional Muslim law to exempt himself from any further liability.
Well before the Shah Bano case, however, the increasingly activist Indian Supreme Court had already established in a 1979 case that a Muslim ex-husband would only be exempt from further payments to his ex-wife if the payments were sufficient for her “to keep body and soul together”.
What does our Constitution say about Uniform Civil Code? In article 44, our constitution clearly specifies this: "The State shall endeavor to secure the citizen a uniform civil code through out the territory of India".
However, in response to this, there exist-
Article 14 which guarantees the Fundamental Right of equality before law.
Article 15 which prohibits discrimination against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth .
Articles 25-29 providing religious and cultural freedom...
Article 13 of the Constitution says that all laws in force in India at the time of the commencement of the constitution, if repugnant to any of the fundamental rights, have to cease to apply in any manner whatsoever.
Article 372 at the same time requires that "all the laws in force in the territory of India immediately before the commencement of this constitution shall continue in force therein until altered or repealed or amended by a competent legislature or other competent authority."
Article 15 requires non-discrimination based on "sex". It goes against the Indian constitution when Muslim Personal Law favours the man in cases of divorce and polygamy. Equality before the law would essentially mean that Muslim women could take up to four husbands.
BR Ambedkar while making the constitution had an axe to grind with Hinduism.
Who was BR Ambedkar?
Punch into Google search-
CNN-IBN POLL GREATEST INDIAN SINCE MAHATMA GANDHI VADAKAYIL
Muslims who are NOT a majority in other countries accept uniform civil laws where they do not consider this as a personal defeat whereas in India it is. This is the result of the vulgar secularism. In India secularism is all about vote bank politics. Indian Muslims vote for Muslims candidates —in general.
Is it secular to have different laws for different religion or it is secular to have a uniform law, where all are equal ?
A uniform civil code administers the same set of secular civil laws to govern all people irrespective of their religion, caste and tribe. This supersedes the right of citizens to be governed under different personal laws based on their religion or caste or tribe.
Such codes are in place in most modern nations,and in India only in Goa.
This was a sham by the Portuguese, who tried to historically delete their immoral and sadistic Goan Inquisition .
Punch into Google search-
PORTUGUESE INQUISITION IN GOA ORDERED BY FRANCIS XAVIER VADAKAYIL
Hindus, Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists come under Hindu law, whereas Muslims and Christians have their own laws. Muslim law is based on the Sharia.
The Indian Mullahs try to cling on to power. Once an UCC comes into force, nobody will care for them. Even in Pakistan the 1961 Muslim Family Law Ordinance of Pakistan "makes it obligatory for a man who desires to take a second wife to obtain a written permission from a government appointed Arbitration Council" – superceeding the Shariat Act of 1937.
It is a shame that India has yet to learn from Pakistan , how to protect Muslim women.
You will find moth eaten faces like Shabana Azmi waiting in ambush like a spider, to hog the limelight. Are we to assume that she does NOT understand all this?
Where more than 80% of citizens have already been brought under codified personal law, there is no justification whatsoever to keep the remaining 20% in abeyance just for vote banks.
Now let us apply our collective commonsense to find out which article of the constitution must take preponderence.. No intelligence or literacy is required here.
This is like the “Order of Operations – BODMAS”
But, when you see something like...
1 + 5 x 6 - 3 + (4 - 2)
... what part should you calculate first?
Calculate them in the wrong order, and you will get a wrong answer !
This is where BODMAS kicks in !
B- Brackets first
O- Orders (ie Powers and Square Roots, etc.)
DM- Division and Multiplication (left-to-right)
AS- Addition and Subtraction (left-to-right)
“Secular India” must not interfere in the religious matters of various communities. However, a reverse point can be made as well i.e. why should a secular India give such sweeping exemptions based on religion?
Principle of secularism means that state will not discriminate against individuals on the basis of their religious beliefs or lack of it. But by instituting religion based personal laws state is doing precisely that!
Is there NO intelligence in our law makers or judiciary? Is there NO intelligent “think tank”?
Can we made a BODMAS to kick in UCC.
Article 44 is based on the concept that there is no necessary connection between religion and personal law in a civilised society.
Article 25 guarantees religious freedom whereas Article 44 seeks to divest religion from social relations and personal law.
Marriage, succession and like matters of a secular character cannot be brought within the guarantee enshrined under Articles 25, 26 and 27.
Punch into google search-
PERCEPTION AND RELATIVITY VADAKAYIL
And read about 3 friends, 3 beers and the missing dollar.
We all know the great tamasha of the Sania Mirza marriage, where her Muslim Pakistani cricketer husband married his first Indian Muslim wife on--- “hold your breath” -- telephone!!
Everybody knows that Shoaib Malik left his first wife Ayesha Siddiqui just because she became fat.
Like the mullahs seem to be trying to convey, UCC does not insist people from one religion to start practicing rituals of other religions. All it says is, with changing living styles along with the time, there should be a uniform civil code irrespective of all religions as far as social ethics are concerned.
Hindus have accepted changes in their personal laws with grace. Child marriages were banned, Sati was banned, widow re-marriage was encouraged, divorce was introduced, inheritance laws were amended and Hindus accepted all these changes. They never complained of hurting their religious sentiments like the Muslims.
Muslims in other countries , where they are in minority accept uniform civil laws where they do not consider this as a great defeat whereas in India it is. This is the result of the vulgar vote bank politics.
During independence in 1947, all hardcore Indian Muslims were given the free option of going to Pakistan. It is NOT that they were never given a choice. These people who decided to stay back in India and now crying hoarse about UCC as an attempt to destroy “Muslim Identity”.
The vast majority of Muslims led by the Jumiat al-Ulama and other orthodox Muslim groups have fought tooth and nail against any change to the Personal Law, and this includes educated Indian Muslims too.
All this is despite Muslims being pampered and allowed to go on Haj pilgrimage with government subsidy with taxes paid by majority Hindus. The Muslim Madrassas which breed terrorists too are being subsidized by taxed paid by Hindu majority. We do know of the inflow of Saudi Wahabi funds too for desh drohi activities.
That “Secular India” must not interfere in the religious matters of various communities is pure nonsense. Secular India must NOT give such sweeping exemptions based on religion, when a Muslim man can marry four times , while men of other religions will be thrown into jail .
A uniform civil code doesn’t mean it will limit the freedom of people to follow their religion, it just means that every person will be treated the same. This is the meaning of secularism, NOT majority bashing or proving that majority is always wrong. .
All the laws related to marriage, inheritance, family, land etc. should be equal for all Indians. This is the only way to ensure that all Indians are treated same.
The biggest benefit is that India will be rid of vote bank politics. Not having a uniform civil code is detrimental to true democracy and that has to change.
UCC will cut the strength from under the feet of the power drunk mullahs. Power is also an intoxicant. Islam prohibits intoxication. UCC is NOT about Muslim bashing.
This change for the better , especially for the Muslim women ( which is 50% of the Muslim population ) must come from within the educated sections Muslim community itself.
Even Islam allows a Muslim who is hungry for three days to taken forbidden food.
Divorce should not be a hasty decision and an impulsive or ego laden act. Sufficient time is given to both parties to consider reconciliation before they finally decide to part.
The Koran has been very fair in this regard. Koran introduces several time capsule stages for final separation, so that the married couple may reconsider their position before jumping off the deep end.
Islamic divorce is to be pronounced thrice after each menstrual period called “Tuhrs”. Repudiation must not take place during menstruation. This provides enough time for relatives to come from far off places , to intervene, counsel and protect the interests of the helpless wife and children. In most of the Muslim countries divorce has been made a judicial act.
When divorce is initiated by the wife and the husband consents to it, divorce is known as ‘Khula’. In several Muslim countries, new laws have been framed to enforce this concession given to women. But in India Khula has no legal sanction.
Islam does NOT permit polygamy unconditionally. It is allowed only when it helps the new woman and it is more to help orphan girls and helpless widows.
Sameer Ali in his “Spirit of Islam”, says, “You may marry two, three, or four wives, but not more”. The subsequent lines declare, “but if you cannot deal equitably and justly with all, you shall marry only one, (IV: 3).
India is still one one of the only countries where Muslim women are rarely allowed to pray in mosques. .
Marriages are not required to be registered, and sometimes made without women’s consent.
Muslim women’s groups have argued that since personal laws are uncodified, customary practices have superseded the laws of the holy Koran.
It is high time, the issue receives the serious consideration of our Ulema, and if they fail to see reason they must be told to LUMP the UCC, with or without a pinch of salt.
In the olden days, yes these mullahs were known to be Koran experts. Today anybody educated woman can download the Koran on the internet and be an expert in one month flat—more so when women are NOT allowed to participate in the Islamic decision-making process affecting their lives and souls.
Muslim women must demand equality as enshrined in the Koran .
India is not an Islamic country and in fact, has a secular code for criminal law. If the Muslim community has accepted a non-sharia code in one sphere, then logically, it should be amenable to such a code in other spheres as well.
For a country to progress law be divorced from religion. Only then India will emerge as a much more cohesive and integrated nation.
The mullahs will never support the Muslim woman , as they stand to lose their falthu power. Muslim society became gradually feudalised and women acquired a subjugated status only because of these selfish mullahs.
Can you imagine the mullahs have been saying this –
Bernard Shaw has said ( sic !) “the laws of marriage and divorce given by Islam are most suitable for our times.”
TEE HEEEE !
Bernard Shaw never said that!!
George Bernard Shaw was a Rothschild stooge who praised the Red Communist Bolsheviks and Jew Stalin. No wonder he got the Nobel prize and was planted as a founder of the London School of Economics. He went all the way to Moscow to meet Stalin in 1931.
Grace and peace !
CAPT AJIT VADAKAYIL
..
0 comments:
Post a Comment