Shaban Bukhari (19), a student of social work at Amity University, will be coroneted as ‘Naib Shahi Imam’ (deputy royal cleric) of the grand Mughal-era mosque in a ceremony on November 22. The list of invitees include Congress president Sonia Gandhi, vice president Rahul Gandhi, Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh, Health Minister Dr Harshvardhan, BJP Rajya Sabha MP Vijay Goel, Shahnawaz Hussain, head of states like Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Tunisia, Egypt and around 1,000 religious leaders from India and abroad.
Bukhari faced the most scathing attack from his brother Yahya Bukhari who told INNLIVE, “After being ignored by Muslims of the country, he is trying to make a comeback to the media notice. By not extending invitation to PM Modi, he is trying to become messiah of Muslims. But he must understand he cannot make Muslims fools and it was proved when the community did not pay heed to his call to support Congress in the general elections.”
“If he likes the Pakistan PM so much and dislikes our prime minister, he should hold the coronation ceremony in Pakistan,” he added.
For former Delhi Minority Commission chairman Kamal Farooqui, who is also a member of All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), the decision is not in “good taste”. “I personally feel it is not in good taste. Of course, it is his prerogative whom to invite and whom not but if he is trying to do it in the name of Muslims, he must understand that when he is inviting other political leaders, especially Nawaz Sharif, he should have extended invitation to our prime minister as well else he should not have invited Nawaz Sharif either,” he told INNLIVE.
Rubbishing Bukhari’s claim that the dastaar bandi (turban-tying ceremony) is his “personal function”, Farooqui said, “Had it been the marriage ceremony of his son or daughter, it would have his personal function. The gathering is completely political and un-Islamic because imamat cannot be passed on general to generation.”
“His claim that he did not invite Modi because Muslims are not happy with his highly objectionable. He does not represent Muslims at large and therefore, who the hell he is to speak on behalf of. Even if he has personal relations with Sharif, as he claims, he should not have invited him because of the tension at the LoC,” he added.
Islamic feminist writer Sheeba Aslam Fahmi has objection on the title of ‘Shahi Imam’. “When there is no monarchy in India, how can a person be conferred upon the title of Shahi Imam or Imam-ul-Sultan, which means Imam of emperor? There are thousands of mosques in this country that were constructed by Mughals. The Jama Masjid of Agra was also a royal mosque while Agra was the capital of Mughals, then why only Ahmed Bukhari claims this title as his inheritance?” she asked.
The history of Jama Masjid or Masjid-e-Jane-Jahanuma dates back to 17th century. It was by Mughal Emperor Shah Jahan as the central mosque for the capital city of Shahjahanabad. Shah Jahan invited Hazrat Abdul Ghafur Shah — an established Islamic scholar from Bukhara — to lead the regular prayers at the Jama Masjid. Shah was designated as the Shahi Imam or Imam-ul-Sultan of the Jama Masjid. Over a period of time, the Imam of Jama Masjid, emerged as some kind of religious-cultural authority. The Imamat of this mosque is still inherited in the very family from generation to generation. The elder son of the Imam succeeds his father as the Shahi Imam of Jama Masjid. The Imam delegates his responsibilities to his son in a public ceremony, which is called dastarbandi.
Taking Sheeba’s arguments further, Hilal Ahmed, assistant professor at the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies, Delhi, said, “Even the Delhi Wakf Board (DWB), which used to manage the Jama Masjid, had refused to recognise Ahmad Bukhari’s father Abdullah Bukhari as the legitimate Shahi Imam. He had forced his father and the then Imam of the Jama Masjid to declare him the Imam.”
Going deeper in the history, Hilal, who is the author of Muslim Political Discourse in Postcolonial India: Monuments, Memory, Contestation, Routledge, 2014, says, “The institutional conflict over the control of the mosque between Abdullah Bukhari and the DWB eventually led to a series of communal conflicts. The most violent event took place on February 2, 1975, when Bukhari, along with his supporters, entered the premises of the DWB and publicly slapped the then Chairperson of the Board and the Union Minister, Shah Nawaz Khan. He was arrested and booked under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act (MISA).
“The Imam’s supporters led by Bukhari’s son Ahmad Bukhari, however, had a different plan. They came back to the Jama Masjid and announced that the Imam had been assassinated by the police. This news created a stir and a violent conflict erupted between local Muslims and the police in which seven people died.
“By that time Bukhari was released from jail, he had become the national Muslim leader. He established full control over the mosque and started issuing election fatwas in the name of representing Muslims.”
When asked about Shahi Imam’s invitation to Nawaz Sharif, he said, “By extending invitation to Sharif and ignoring PM Modi, he (Ahmad Bukhari) had tried to give a message that Muslims in India have implicit relationship with Pakistan, which is not true.”
For Moh’d Reyaz, a research scholar at Jamia Millia Islamia, Syed Ahmed Bukhari is a “shrewd politician more than a cleric”. “By selectively inviting people, he has made sure that the debate is diverted form more pertinent issue of system of hereditary succession or for that matter mismanagement of the mosque. Moreover, Naib-Imam implies that in the absence of Imam Bukhari, his 19-year-old son will lead the prayer or give khutba (sermon) on Friday. Is he competent enough? What are his qualifications? Was internal family dispute the reason behind the hasty decision?”
“The grand mosque has sadly been reduced to the personal estate,” he says.
Accusing the Shahi Imam of insulting Indian Muslims, Forum for Muslim Studies and Analysis (FMSA) – a body of Muslim intellectuals in Aligarh (FMSA)- urged the government "this to end this “un-Islamic Imamat through an act of Parliament".
“Bukhari was at liberty not to invite Modi, he should not have invited Sharif. By inviting the Pakistan PM and ignoring Modi, he has insulted Indian Muslims because Modi is the prime minister of all citizens of the country, including Muslims,” said FMSA Secretary Jasim Mohammed.
“Passing on imamat is un-Islamic and undemocratic that should not be allowed to go unchallenged. It must end,” he added.
But it is amazing as to how he has hastened to appoint his successor who is still in his college. Another amazing aspect is the fact that he hasn’t appointed his eldest son. Shaban who is studying at a private university seems ill prepared for the job at the moment.
Columnist and author Sadia Dehlvi said, “It is a kind of dirty confrontational politics. It is a disrespect of the office of the prime minister. The title of Shahi Imam has no authority. In fact, it is an imaginary position. He should not be taken seriously.”
Although Bukhari chose not to invite Prime Minister Modi (who is alleged to have played a role in the 2002 Gujarat riots but has been exonerated by a court of law) to the event, he sent out invites to several BJP leaders, including Rajnath Singh, Dr Harsh Vardhan, Vijay Goel and Shahnawaz Hussain. Congress President Sonia Gandhi and Vice President Rahul Gandhi have also got invitation.
Justifying his decision of not inviting Modi, Bukhari said on Thursday, “I have invited several Indian and foreign political leaders for attending the anointment ceremony of my son. Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif has also been invited, but I have not sent invitation to Prime Minister Narendra Modi as Muslims have not forgiven him for the Gujarat riots. It is not a personal fight. He does not like us and we do not like him.”
No comments:
Post a Comment