New Delhi, October 9: Kerala Governor Arif Mohammad Khan on Saturday said he rejects the ‘majority-minority’ binary when it comes to India as all its citizens enjoy “equal rights” unlike Pakistan. where is the “ceiling”. who are not Muslims.” In an interaction during a conference in Delhi, he also said that there is “no concept of discrimination” on the basis of religion in Indian civilization and “our cultural heritage”.
Khan said he has been debating for a long time and asking people to show him a provision in the Constitution which talks of minority rights in religious context. Words like “majority’ and ‘minority’, what does that (classification) mean? I have never accepted an appellate minority.”
“What do you mean by that word, that I am less than equal. I am a proud Indian citizen who has equal rights.” During the India Today Conclave, he was speaking on the segment ‘Majority, Minority: The Battle of Belonging’.
“Indian civilization has never been defined by religion, all other civilizations were defined either by religion, mostly by religion, and even before that by race and language,” he argued and supported his claim. Quoted some verses. To a question whether Indian politics has moved from minority appeasement to majoritarianism in the last few decades, Khan claimed that the word ‘Hindu’ is not used in any of our texts.
“We were ruled by foreigners for a long time, and I do not mean in a negative sense, but in the sense that they were not familiar with the Indian ethos and philosophy and outlook. No when did this journey begin, but it was never defined by religious faith.” They (foreign rulers) had their own view that this civilization, its background was ‘defined by religion’.” One has to use a word that is symbolic, and used more in the sense of belief, that’s why they used it,” he claimed.
But the leaders of Indian ideology were never satisfied with that title, he said. Hence the Constituent Assembly included Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, them in the definition of Hinduism, making it clear that the word ‘Hindu’ does not mean uniformity of belief or uniformity of practices. matters of religion. Hence, the word ‘Hindu Rashtra’ means nothing,” Khan said.
“It is not only our constitution which gives equal rights to the people, but more than that our cultural heritage, there is no concept of discrimination on the basis of religion in Indian civilization, so to link the two, I find it absurd, ” They said. Khan argued that minority rights are needed in countries that are theological because there is a limit to development and citizens are not treated equally.
He said, “India has never had a theocracy, so when you say ‘Hindu Rashtra’, you are comparing it to Muslim theocracy or Christian theocracy, which existed in the past, and somewhere it still exists. exist,” he said. Khan also said that any citizen of India who wears an “identity badge” other than an Indian one will “have a problem”. And, Indians who wear a badge of identity may face a problem, but constitutionally and legally speaking. , there is no such issue.
While reciting a verse, he said, the ancient Indian philosophy has been that it is the duty of the political system to provide equal protection to all. “In Pakistan, yes minority rights are needed because those who are not Muslims have a limit.
“They cannot aspire to certain positions, they are discriminated against,” Khan alleged. Khan has been a vocal critic of the practice of instant triple talaq and has been demanding reforms in Muslim personal law for a long time.
His speech in Parliament in the wake of Shah Bano’s decision in 1985, which extended his initial support to the Rajiv Gandhi government, was highly acclaimed. However, when the Rajiv Gandhi government under alleged pressure from Muslim clerics took a U-turn and brought a bill to nullify the Supreme Court order, he resigned from the ministry.
The Uttar Pradesh politician later joined the BJP, but has been inactive since 2007. When the Modi government brought in a law to criminalize the practice of instant triple talaq, Khan supported it.
On the Shah Bano case, Khan said that he spoke out against the All India Muslim Personal Law Board as it used a term to refer to the case which was in fact a “euphemism”, which indicated that a group of people The certain class felt that they were not part of it. “Mainstream of India” and “I think elements that promote partition or separatism should not be promoted”.
Disclaimer: This post has been self-published from the agency feed without modification and has not been reviewed by an editor
read all breaking news, breaking news And coronavirus news Here. follow us on Facebook, Twitter And Wire.