Daily Times

When my article Bigots Like Afridi Have Distorted the Teachings of the Quran, published in theweek.in.com, was posted on my Facebook page, hundreds of Muslims commented on it. While between 10 and 20 per cent of them supported my views, the remaining 80 to 90 per cent let loose a barrage and tirade of vituperation and invectives on me, some of the diatribe being abusive.

This is the problem with most, though not all, Muslims. They don’t want to hear any criticism of themselves, particularly from a non-Muslim, even if the criticism is rational and for their good. Even the Supreme Court was not spared when it delivered the well-known Shahbano verdict granting maintenance to a divorced Muslim woman. Anyone with even the slightest human feelings would have supported the judgment, but no, it must be opposed as it was against the sharia. And so there was such a howl by most Muslims at that time that Rajiv Gandhi, fearing losing his Muslim vote bank, got the verdict annulled by the parliament.

When I was a judge in the Supreme Court, a case from Orissa came before the bench in which I was sitting. The facts were that a Muslim man, in his early 30s and having four children, had drunk a lot and in that state pronounced triple talaq on his wife. This was not revealed to anyone for quite some time, but after a month the wife stupidly told a friend, who told it to others, and the story spread. When the local maulvi came to know about it he pronounced that the couple were no longer husband and wife, and so could not live together until the woman had a nikah halala with another man who divorces her. Only then can she remarry the first husband. A crowd of frenzied Muslims came to the house of the couple demanding they separate, and the woman’s pleading that she had four small children and where can she go were of no avail.

A PIL was filed in the matter before the Orissa HC, and when that failed an appeal came to the Supreme Court. I said that this was a civilised country, and Muslims too must behave in a civilised manner. How was it anyone’s business whether the couple lived together or not? And sharia cannot prevail over the Constitution. Saying so, I ordered the police to give protection to the couple, and take strong action against those interfering with their lives.

The new political dispensation in India, though it has politically sidelined Muslims completely, will do them good because it will compel them to think… and realise that rationalism and modernisation, as shown by the great Mustafa Kemal of Turkey, is their only hope for salvation

I have repeatedly praised Islam for spreading the great message of equality, and bringing social emancipation to the suppressed sections of society. At the same time I do not agree with wearing burqa, and have called for abolition of sharia and promulgation of a uniform civil code.

Law has to change as society changes. How can a law made in Arabia in the 7th and 8th century apply in India in the 21st century? Can the Manu smriti be applied today? Abolition of sharia will not mean abolition of Islam. The old un-codified Hindu Law was almost entirely abolished by the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, etc. but that did not abolish Hinduism.

The problem with most Muslims is that they do not welcome even rational criticism by well wishers like me, and often get infuriated by it. For instance, while I have often praised Islam for the social emancipation it brought to the suppressed sections of society, I have also said that all of the Quran cannot be taken literally, and much of it has to be taken figuratively or metaphorically. For instance, I do not believe the story in it that the angel Gabriel appeared in 610 AD in Mount Hira and conveyed the message of Allah to Muhammad [peace be upon him]. I do not believe the story of the Prophet’s Night Journey on a winged horse called Burraq from Mecca to Jerusalem and then to heaven (Isra and Miraj). I do not believe that there is a thing called hellfire. But to tell most Muslims that these are fictional, and should not be taken literally, would be inviting their wrath.

Most Indian Muslims are poor and backward, as the Justice Sachar Committee Report states. But they have been deliberately kept in that condition by politicians, who have used them as a vote bank, and clerics, who have wanted to keep a hold on them for their own benefit. At one time some Muslim politicians and maulanas had become so arrogant that they thought no government could be formed without them. They behaved like king makers.

The new political dispensation in India, though it has politically sidelined Muslims completely, will do them good because it will compel them to think why they are in such a sorry plight, and realise that rationalism and modernisation, as shown by the great Mustafa Kemal of Turkey, is their only hope for salvation. I appeal to the enlightened Muslim youth to spread this message

The writer is a former judge of the Supreme Court of India