What does the death of Osama bin Laden mean to Indian Muslims? How do Islamic scholars see the world's biggest terrorist? A range of views emerged in conversations with a cross-section of Muslim intelligentsia. Yet one emotion seemed to override all others: Islam can never condone the perversities of Osama, and certainly not Indian Muslims who have carried the terrorist tag because of this one man. One budding Muslim writer retorted: why do you even ask us about him?
Jamia Millia Islamia Vice-Chancellor Najeeb Jung said there was no reaction to Osama's death on his campus or in the nearby Muslim neighbourhood of Jamia Nagar. “This is a reflection of the Indian Muslim's disinterest in Osama.” Mr. Jung also rejected the notion that Muslims elsewhere could feel sympathy for Osama, except perhaps in pockets of Pakistan. The VC said Osama was killed at a time when even the al-Qaeda had begun to speak in disparate voices. “Sections of the al-Qaeda would be happy to have a new leadership.”
Fatwas against Osama
Maulana Syed Athar Dehlavi, Chairman of Anjuman Minhaje Rasool, said Osama had defied and defiled Islam with his statements even before the horrific 9/11 attacks and this was why the Minhaje Rasool issued a fatwa against him as early as 1998. “We were not only the first Muslim organisation to issue a fatwa, we also appealed to Ulema the world over to issue fatwas against him.” The Maulana, however, added that Muslims will always hold the United States as guilty as Osama for creating him.
Manzoor Alam, who heads the Institute of Objective Studies, pointed out that far from being a fakir, Osama did not even have a degree in Islamic theology. He was never treated as knowledgeable on the Koran and Sunna, and across the Muslim world religious leaders held him in scorn. Fatwas were issued against him by such authorities as Ibn Baaz, the great Mufti of Saudi Arabia, and Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the popular Egyptian theologian.
Dr. Alam was emphatic that Indian Muslims would remain unaffected by any post-Osama radicalism: “Our youth have stayed clear of al-Qaeda and have shown time and again that they believe in the Indian Constitution.”
“Democracy, the sole option”
Scholar Mushir-ul-Hasan said Osama had no relevance in today's world: “In the light of the democracy movement in the Islamic world, it is very clear that the only option for Muslims lies in the democratic process and not in terrorism.” He argued that historically whenever Muslims had been allowed to exercise their option, they had chosen democracy. However, once the options were foreclosed by colonialism and western power, it appeared as if Muslims had become susceptible to the terrorist rhetoric: “Now that the global landscape has changed, these ideas deserve to be consigned to the dustbin of history.”
Columnist Aijaz Ilmi said Osama wanted to give divine sanction to his message of terror which was nowhere in the book. As for Indian Muslims, more than anyone else they were bound to be thankful for Osama's death: “Muslims have been demonised because of Osama and 9/11.”
Young writer Tanweer Alam was upset that Muslim reaction was sought whenever the subject of Pakistan or terrorism came up: “Whether it is an India-Pakistan cricket match or a terror attack or now Osama, we have to be on test. Why should our reaction be any different from that of Hindus? This only reinforces the perception that Indian Muslims are not part of the mainstream.”
Keywords: al-Qaeda, Indian Muslims, Osama death, post-Osama radicalism
@S Chattopadhyay: Firstly I want to clarify that in no way do I support or encourage terrorism or terrorist activities. We are ordinary people who work and live our lives without ever thinking outside the box. It is this disability which gives our enemies an advantage over us. The American CIA will go to any lengths to gain what they want. These people blend in with the public and are trained to be "ghosts" meaning they are untraceable.
Many people are commenting saying why other acts of terrorism were not brought to justice, even when they might have been as dramatic as 9/11. That is one thing I had never thought about. Also I agree, why do Indian Muslims have to be asked such absurd questions and prove their loyalty? Responding to Saad; you say that the crimes Osama has committed have only been blared up by the US media? Well, that is just insane. He not only terrorized US, but he has also killed many Muslims. And the death of Osama have left families thinking they have gotten justice, but honestly if anything, there WILL be more attacks. The US needs to go back to the beginning and see WHY they are hated by so many people and try and address those issues.
The issue is not weather to support Osama or not, as first a Human being, I do not think any sensible person would support killing of even a single innocent person. The question I will ask the whole world, how do you trust blindly US,who, blammed Saddam of having Weapons of Mass destruction and attacked him and killed him within a year, while he did not have anything. Also, why US was not questioned when UN asked not to attack Iraq and US did? And no one question him. It is not Muslim Vs others, but, to me, it is justice Vs injustice. If Osama was in fact a culprit, he should have been punished to death, but, how should I believe that he was? Just based on US media report or some vedios issued by Al Jazeera time to time, when it was required. World is a place to live with brotherhood, let it be a place to live and do not divide it in the name of religion or power. No sensible person will support Osama, if he really did what have been projected about him, it is not only Indian Muslim.
Why can't the media let the poor Indian muslims live in peace in this country? The media is always on the lookout for something sensational that may not fit in to the way it thinks it should and blows it out of proportion. Osama Bin Laden was an individual who may have been responsible for the deaths of many people. But what about state sponsored terrorism witnessed in India, USA and other places. Why dont we have to give justice to the victims in Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Balkan States, Iraq and Afghanisthan?
Prabhakaran was a terrorist who was wanted in the death of Rajiv Gandhi. The consititution of India prohibits people from speaking about secession and support to terrorists. Ms. Vidya Subramaniam and Mr. Ram may well do some research in Chennai about Mr. Tirumavalavan's posters with Prabakaran in the backdrop and secessionist ideas imprinted in Tamil .He is supposed to be an MP who has taken the oath of loyalty to India. He is a Hindu. Is he not a terrorist, by supporting and advocating a secessionist idea, banned by our constitution? I can expect such type of narrow-minded and cheap reports appearing in The Times of India or any other sub-standard newspaper. Such type of news reports in your paper makes me wonder whether 'The Hindu' has decided to abandon its much-feted independent coverage?
Why is it that the Muslims of India have to prove their patriotism/nationalism to this country every now and then? When a bunch of terrorists attacked Mumbai, the media went with a mike to every Muslim they could think of and asked them the same question. Do you support this? The Ulemas of Deoband gave a fatwa against terrorism. This was brandied about like anything. Again, now when Osama bin Laden has been murdered, the media goes about the town asking Muslims to prove their loyalty to their nation?
Why isnt it that the Hindus of India are asked whether they support the genocide that happened in Gujarat, or the Anti-Sikh riots in 1984, or do they support the Mahatma or his killer? Why arent Sikhs asked if they support Bindranwale? And why arent Christians asked about Hitler and Mussolini who received full support from the Head of the Catholic Church?
This is the gravest insult you can think for the 180 million Muslims who have opted to live / been born in this country and it makes me sick to think of this. Obama says that justice has been delivered to the victims of 9/11 through Osama's death. Possibly. But what about the more than 500000 children alone who died from cancer in Iraq due to the depleted uranium shells used and left behind by George H.W Bush and his invading army. What about the justice for the nations of Afghanisthan and Iraq that have been devastated and will take decades to recover?
Did anyone bother to give justice to the victims of Hiroshima and Nagasaki? And if the media cares for justice, what about some justice for the victims of 1984 and 2002.
The author should note that it is hard for Indians to have a single opinion on anything. The diversity in our opinions are so vast that it is hard to get a same opinion from five people. People, Muslims in India and elsewhere are stratified in opinions based on their upbringing, social setup, and philosophies. Depending on what strata they are, they may find commonalities with Al Qaeda, Nazis, Maoists, or the KKK. Any radical philosophy is based on social oppression, and until the fundamental problem is solved; but the problems can never be solved with greed and ego founding our principles.
@Ganesh Balasubramanian: Velupillai Prabhakaran is a lapsed Methodist(Christian) and not a hindu. Not that it makes any difference. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vellupillai_Prabhakaran
It doesn't make sense questioning Indian Muslims for what ever a pathetic person like Osama has done. This funnily reminds me of what the great Boxer Mohamed Ali once said when he was asked a similar question by a reporter following the 9/11 attacks. M Ali seems to have retorted asking the reporter as to how she felt about Adolf Hitler being a christian. We can very well check with hindus about how they feel about Velupillai Prabhakaran being a hindu and how many groups within TN have gone about openly supporting his terrorist activities.
I have to agree with Tanweer Alam; Indian muslims as a group or as a section of the Indian society should not be asked or expected to justify their position re. terrorism. There may be a disaffected minority who may engage in terrorist activity but there is also a disaffected minority of Hindus who are engaged in terrorist activity in India.
@Rahul: Jammu and Kashmir is a different situation. You cannot compare the situation in Jammu and Kashmir with the situation in say Uttar Pradesh or West Bengal. My position is different. Most of the Indians do not treat their fellow Indians muslims or otherwise as terrorists. If Muslims of Jammu and Kashmir feel that Osama was their saviour, then the author has to change her stance and i need not. After Godhra 2002, there has been no largescale violence against Muslims in India. Hope this continues eternally. Are you saying that most of the Indians have been and are treating Muslims as terrorists due to Osama? That has never been the case. Most of the maoists who are either being killed or arrested(Binayak Sen) and villagers who are caught in the crossfire are not muslims. So saying that India crushes the human rights of muslims alone and that she treats Muslims as second class citizens is reprehensible.
@Dil TarMohamed: Are you joking? You are suggesting that the United States staged 9/11? Killing 5000 of its citizens, causing billions of dollars worth of damage and wrecking its own economy for a mineral that no one has ever heard of?? And if the Muslims of Mumbai refused to bury the terrorists involved in the Bombay attacks, how can you guarantee that any Muslim country would have given a mass murdered a religious burial?
To the author: I think Indian Muslims have already proved that they are part of the 'mainstream' what ever that might be by refusing to give a religious burial to the terrorists of 26/11 in Mumbai. They should not be asked time and again to 'prove their loyalty' to India.
Theoretically in India, muslims are considered equal. They are fostered withequal rights as any other religion. But the question here is whether their rights are equally repected by Armed forces or not? I am taking into account the majority muslims living in J&K. Are they living a prosperous and secure life like any other india? @Siva Bhaskaran: go and ask the muslims of J&K whether they felt happy on the Osama news. You will get a convincing answer. Surf on youtube for News channel interview regarding Osama, you will hear some from north india that conveys you, how human rights are crushed in India too.
Neither India nor majority of Indians of any faith treat their fellow indians of any faith as terrorists. APJ Abdul Kalam the previous president was a muslim. Salman Kursheed, Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi, Irfan Pathan, Yousuf Pathan, Sharukh, Salman, Aamir and many millions of others were never considered terrorists. People like Diltar do not represent the view of majority of muslims in India. For the last time Muslims in India are not treated as second class citizens. They enjoy the same rights as their Hindu counterparts do. Indian muslims never had to live with the terrorist tag. In fact Indian muslims are treated much better than their Pakistani counterparts in the west.
Its great that our Indian brother's feel so, proving them time and again that the are the real Muslims and true Indians. Osama is a bad chapter brought up and down by the same party. This should be a lesson for Pakistan that a snake fed with pure milk will return nothing but poison. At the people responsible for such attacks & acts should be dealt with.
I honestly think the author has not tried hard enouh to seek Indian Muslim opinion. Had she bothered to check copies of certain newspapers (mainly in vernacular languages like Malayalam, Kannada and Urdu)run by Islamist groups, she would have changed her opinion! "Thejas" a popular Malayalam newspaper published by 'Popular Front of India' wrote in its editorial that, Osama is a 'fighter' (not a terrorist) who have martyred fighting for the cause of Islam. This newspaper further states that 9/11 attacks are natural reactions of an oppresed community. Comments section of this newspaper further proves the radical nature of its readers. Most of the readers either congratulated the 'martyr' or outright rejected the very existence of Osama. Such views could be freely found in many Kannada, Urdu newspapers too. I think Vidya is only hearing what she wanted to hear. Unfortunately truth is slightly different!
What about Zakir Naik who goes on satellite television with his apologetic defending Osama and his terrorist acts? 'The Hindu' has looked at only one side of a coin; Wikileaks published in Hindu a month back had indicated how Islamic extremist activities go on unabated in UP. The articles and views published here only agree with the opinion of 'The Hindu', but I don't think they are representative of the ground realities.
The problem is not whether the majority of muslims support him. It is whether the few that support him can perpetrate terrorist acts against democratic forces that are promoting a multicultural society. We don't see much Islamic terrorist activities against China because it is viciously stamped out. The question is can Islam exist in a pluralist society. This question still hasn't been answered. The fate of minorities in Islamic countries remains bleak. Even in Iraq when there was an opportunity to develop a truly secular government, the constitution was eventually based on Islam. The ability of a few radicals to derail the establishment of true democracies in Islam dominated countries can only be countered by strong moderate, charismatic muslim leaders and often such figures are simply eliminated. This is a problem even in developed countries (eg Bush) because by nature radicals are louder and willing to take extreme actions.
This article is silly, but also wrong. Muslims are entitled to feel any way they want and many do. Many of them have sympathy for Osama Bin Laden but that does not make them terrorists in any way. This foolish writer wants to see what would be politically correct. One important indication of what Muslims care about can be seen in the comments of Digvijay Singh of Congress. He is a smart politician who fully understands Muslims and their concerns. He is also interested in benefiting from it. That's the reason he has expressed his anger against the American action. Syed Gelani's reaction is another example of somebody who seeks to take advantage of Muslim sensibilities. Finally, it should be noted that it is too soon to judge what many Muslims feel. The highly militaristic Pakistani media has just started to go into action. It is to be expected that they will start to focus on the unilateral action by US in a bid to divert attention away from how close Osama lived to Pakistani military installations. This will shape the perceptions of some Indian Muslims. I would strongly remind the writer that 'wishes' do not equate to 'research'. Alas, the ideological writers live in a closed system and remain aloof from the the ordinary Indian.
It is great to hear that Indian Muslims reject terrorism. Islam is presented to westerners as a mostly unified, violent, intollerent, single-minded ideology bent on dominating the world. So it is understandable why people are uneasy. Like many great lies, there is an element of truth on some level, making it easy to use the lie to intimidate others. We need to hear much more from moderate Muslims who condemn violence and espouse liberal democracy (note: more voting does not equate to more democracy). Many interpret silence on the subject as tacit approval or indifference towards terrorism. If that is not true, then do something public and firm so we can see it!
To date, I feel Osama Bin Laden was the victim of a major conspiracy theory. For the record i'm not a supporter of terrorism or AL-Qaeda. I feel the whole 9/11 was staged by the CIA/FBI/ The Bush Administration. In order to enter Afghanistan and move on to Iraq for Oil. I'm a student studying science, while researching I've come a info, on a specific type of mineral only available in Afghan. When compared to gold, and diamond, this material is priceless and has lots of properties. Also I feel the US is exporting opium for Afghan and possibly into Russia. Osama Bin Laden, in my eyes, was a simple freedom fighter looking for independence of Afghan. I am an Indian and a Muslim. I also feel that Osama Bin Laden is still alive. If he was guilty i'm sure the US would have arrested him and put him on trial. Like they did with Saddam Hussian. Reports suggest Osama was killed while unarmed. I feel this is a human-rights violation. There are five possibilities: 1. He died of natural causes years ago 2. Another stunt by the US, to cause distraction from the middle east situation, or its trying to hid some from the world. 3. Osama never existed and just a puppet. 4. It is embarrassing internationally, when a world super-power cannot find ONE MAN. 5. Osama is locked up in Guantanamo.
If Osama was dead, I'm sure there is some form of Video or pictures of him. Finally buried at sea, is bullshit. I feel any country would have accepted his body for burial (afghan or Pakistan) under Islamic law, everyone is equal and only God can judge him.
I do not understand is your reporter Vidya Subramaniam's naive American tag for the murdered person as 'the world's biggest (what on earth can that epithet mean?) terrorist'. Does she not know even the most commonly known truths? As far as the most fearsome people on earth are concerned one is not talking of an individual but a number as large as 307 million (and counting) folks known as the citizens of the United States. Let us call the spades spades--or better still mass human annihilators.
Please Email the Editor