Tuesday, November 30, 2010

Restoration of Talimi Mela: On-line Petition

 


Dear Jamiaets

We request the concerned Jamiaets to please spare couple of minutes for their beloved alma mater and sign the on-line petition to convey their feelings to the Vice Chancellor on the following link:

  http://www.petitiononline.com/tm2010/petition.html

We will be looking forward to receiving your support. Please ask your other friends, class mates and those concerned with the affairs of Jamia to also sign the petition so that the feelings of the maximum number of people can be conveyed. We are sure that together we will be able to make a difference!

Yours sincerely,

 

     

 


.

__,_._,___

Sunday, October 3, 2010

Ayodhya verdict has a message of coexistence: Jamia VC


 

Ayodhya verdict has a message of coexistence: Jamia VC
Indo-Asian News Service
New Delhi, October 01, 2010
First Published: 20:48 IST(1/10/2010)
Last Updated: 20:50 IST(1/10/2010)

The "underlying message" in the Ayodhya verdict is that of coexistence, because India's Muslims and Hindus have to live together and it is time for them to start praying together, Jamia Millia University Vice Chancellor Najeeb Jung says. "I believe the learned judges have actually presented a cocktail of their own 
belief and a mixture of history and jurisprudence. I think they were wrestling with expectations of the society and they have tried to do a match of statesmanship and matchmaking," Jung told IANS in an interview at his office on Friday. The Allahabad High Court in its verdict Thursday gave two-third of the disputed land to two Hindu litigant parties and a third to a Muslim group.

Not dissatisfied with the verdict that gives a go ahead for construction of a Ram temple at the disputed site in Ayodhya, Jung said the judges have passed "a message that you have to live for thousands of years. There is a possibility, try and pray together. There is an underlying message there".

Islam and Hinduism, Jung believes, "are in the DNA of India".

"If any part of the DNA is infected, the body gets cancer. So both communities must see that they have a healthy relationship. That healthy relationship is critical for the motherland."

He said Justice SU Khan, one of the three judges who pronounced the verdict Thursday, had probably kept in mind the Prophet Mohammed's Hudaibiya peace treaty which he signed in the 7th century with then custodians of Kaabah, the holiest of the Muslim shrines in Makkah.

"The Prophet could have fought them to conquer Makkah. But his armies went back and he proposed that they will come peacefully. And the next year they did a peaceful Hajj and entire Makkah was theirs. That is the message of the Prophet. That is what Islam teaches us," the vice chancellor said, "wishing we could travel that extra distance today".

He said that the gesture of peace that Muslims "can make today will wash away all the complexes of the (1947) partition of India. That one gesture will wash away the charges of fundamentalism that a part of you is facing today".

The former civil servant said that there was an opportunity for Muslims "to convert this to a historic opportunity which nobody expects from you.

"But there has to be an equal display of maturity from the rightwing Hindu parties that are interested in building the temple."

He, however, cautioned against any "great demonstration of glee, gloating that we have won this case. There is no need for triumphalism".

He said in law two plus two necessary doesn't make four and "here both parties are dissatisfied".

"The point I am trying to make is that under the present judgment you cannot make anything grand, because what you are forgetting is that the judgment is only about 2.7 acres of land of which you are only getting two-thirds and Muslims only one-third. You can neither build a 'bhavya (grand) temple nor a bhavya mosque.

"There are 70 acres of land near the disputed site which is owned by the central government. Have you ever spoken of that? What can you make in two acres? But it is possible if both communities come together and talk, and tell the government to give us some or all of the land it owns, they can make anything - a magnificent temple, mosque and of course a magnificent history of India."

 
 
.

__,_._,___

Verdict makes me feel like a 2nd-class citizen'


 

Verdict makes me feel like a 2nd-class citizen'

By Shobhan Saxena

New Delhi: The Ayodhya title suit was not just a dispute over a patch of land, it was being seen by many, particularly the minorities, as a test of India's commitment to secularism. So, did India pass the test successfully on Thursday? Though there are no shrill reactions to the verdict from the country's biggest minority group, there are many voices of disappointment.

Historian Irfan Habib feels the "compromise judgment" had come at the cost of history and facts. "It is improper (for the court) to accept the ASI report on the historical fact. Weight has been given to belief. One should be careful in historical facts," says Habib.

Though members of Muslim intelligentsia put up a brave face on TV channels, talking in politically-correct terms, in private, many accept that they see the verdict as "anti-Muslim". "The Muslims of India have been told very clearly that they have to live in this country on the terms set by the majority community. From now on we have to live in constant fear," says a former vice-chancellor of a central university.

But others are a bit more forthcoming. Shabnam Hashmi, well-known social activist who heads Sahmat, says the verdict made her feel like a "second-class citizen". "We will not stop the struggle against irrationality and hatred but we can no longer promise to hand over a secular, democratic nation to you," says Hashmi, in her "message to the next generation".

The Muslims are disappointed but they have not given up hope. And the verdict has not shaken their in the idea of India. "My sentiment about this judgment is in this couplet from Faiz. "Ye dil na umeed to nahi nakaam hi to hai, lambi hai gum ki sham magar sham hi to hai (The heart is despondent but not without hope, long is sorrows evening but its an evening after all)," says Syeda Hameed, a member of the Planning Commission.

Such poetic words notwithstanding, there are fears in the community that the right-wing Hindu fanatics may now start raising old issues of "liberation of Kashi and Mathura". "Today the Lucknow court put its stamp of approval on the destruction of Babri Masjid. Can anybody guarantee us that such incidents will not happen in the future? I guess not," says the former VC.

There is no palpable fear and tension on the streets and everybody is talking about "reconcilaition" and "moving on". This, according to some, is a sign of hope. "Despite the feeling of disappointment, this is an opportunity on both sides to use the interregnum before the time for appeals to talk," says Najeeb Jung, an academic from Jamia Milia Islamia. The Mulsims may be seeking a closure of the issue, but it's hard to deny that verdict has left them sad and disappointed.

(Courtesy: The Times of India)
 

__._,_.___
 

Post-judgment, a chance for Hindus & Muslims to forge new ties - By Najeeb Jung


 

 

Post-judgment, a chance for Hindus & Muslims to forge new ties

By Najeeb Jung 



    After a wait of 61 years, the learned judges presented a cocktail of belief, history and jurisprudence in the Babri Masjid title suit. Wrestling with the expectations of society and influenced by their own beliefs the parts of the judgment revealed thus far manifest an attempt at statesmanship and matchmaking that go beyond the issues they were expected to adjudicate upon. As if on cue, the order is to divide the cake into three slices that may satisfy three expectant children. As expected the parties now prepare for petitioning the Supreme Court. 
    The question now is on the path forward. Should the matter go on to the SC where it will 
perhaps be contested for a further two decades, and even then the outcome may only open sore wounds once again? Or should this be converted into an opportunity, resting upon the understanding that Hindus and Muslims are inherent to the DNA of India, and if parts of the DNA are mutually antagonistic the body turns cancerous? As I write, I comprehend the pain of large sections of Muslim society and the pain of millions of Hindus with regards the judgment. But the deed is done, and is it possible to turn this moment of doubt into one of historical significance when the two communities can forge a new relationship? 
    The answer, at least for Muslims, lies imbedded in Justice Khan's judgment where he quotes the Prophet's (peace be 
upon him), treaty of Hubaida. The Muslim armies had encircled Mecca having converged on Mecca from all parts of Arabia to perform the first Haj. Undeniably, had a battle had taken place, the Muslims would have conquered Mecca and performed the Haj. This victory would not just be a military conquest over a powerful city, but a payback for the atrocities committed on the Prophet and his followers by the powerful Quraish tribe over the past two decades. But, in the midst of all the hysteria, the Prophet held talks with the Quraish. Much to the dismay and shock of the Muslims, he agreed to withdraw for a period of one year. At the conclusion of the year the Muslims would return for Haj without hindrance. No historic decision is ever easy, and the Prophet was questioned by no less than the tallest of his companions, the second Caliph, Hazrat Omar. The following year, the Muslims not only performed the Haj but were welcomed by the Meccans as their own! 
    The minorities anywhere are sensitive to being overwhelmed by the majority. And therefore there is an inherent zeal to protect their beliefs and culture. But in this case we are 
aware that a very large section of the Hindu community realizes the ''majoritarian'' aspect of this judgment and sympathizes with the Muslims. To this end this judgment carries a hope that these two communities which have lived in this ancient land for over 1,000 years can now pray together. This moment presents an opportunity to the Muslim community to emerge from the shadows of history, the stigma of partition, the throes of fundamentalism and stand tall in the interest of the future generations and of the motherland itself. 
    But a word of caution is necessary. Because the judgment is being perceived as a ''majoritarian'' one, there is need for care on the part of the protagonists. Perceptions of glee and exaggerated cries of ''grand'' temple to be constructed will muddy the waters. The question of any construction is indeed a very complex one because the adjudicated site stands only on 2.77 acres of land of which one third is with the Muslims. Another 70 odd acres of adjoining land has been acquired and vests with the government. No ''grand'' temple or mosque can be constructed over less than 2 acres of land, and I believe sensing 
this complexity, spokespersons of various political parties scurried for cover under the excuse of not having read the full judgment. Even if the matter of title is referred to the SC, this complexity shall remain. 
    Perhaps then it is sensible for the government to be more proactive than it has so far been in resolving this matter. This issue is more complicated than Kashmir or the Naxal issue by multiples. However, afraid of the political fallout, successive governments have not attempted a resolution, putting it on the shoulders of the courts. This judgment proves that it will now require a combination of political effort and the legal process if we are to see a peaceful resolution. Unfortunately knowing our system, one can safely presume 
that the government will continue to play safe till it is forced into action. On that presumption we must rely on the greater sense of the people of India, the religious leaders and the intellectuals of all sections of society to look for a resolution. This is the need of the time. In the words of Iqbal: 
    Watan ki fikr kar nadaan musibat aane waali hai, 
    Teri barbaadiyon ke mashware hain aasmanon main, 
    Na samjoge to mit jaaoge e Hindustanwalon, 
    Tumhari dastan tak bhi na hogi daastanon main. 
    (Think for the country o fool, for disaster awaits, The skies speak of your tragedies Worry for the country, Or you will be wiped out) 
    (The writer is vice chancellor of Jamia Millia Islamia)

 
Jamia_Millia_Alumni_directory


__._,_.___
.

__,_._,___

Sunday, May 9, 2010

'Indian Muslims are like twelfth player in a cricket team, always kept as reserve'


 

 

'Indian Muslims are like twelfth player in a cricket team, always kept as reserve'

Saturday, May 08, 2010 08:45:00 PM, Yoginder Sikand, ummid.com

Professor Akhtarul Wasey

Inquilab 1857 to Sacchar Report: Nothing changed for the Indian Muslims: From 1857 to 2007, nothing much has been done for the Indian Muslims. Though Sacchar Report highlights the urgent care this community needs, the Government seems too slow to act on the report......Read Full

The side of Indian Muslims Sachar Committee missed in its Report

Google Translate My Page
Gadgets powered by Google

"The Indian Muslims are like the twelfth player in a cricket team, who is kept simply as a 'reserve'. He is part of the team but is not brought out onto the field along with the other eleven players. He simply sits in the dressing room in the stadium. The Indian Muslim is like that. He is forced to sit in a corner. Ignored, indeed shunned, he spends his time praying that at least one of the eleven players gets hurt so that he can then be called into the field where he can display his talent and make his team win", observed Professor Akhtarul Wasey in an exclusive Interview with Yoginder Sikand.

 

Professor Akhtarul Wasey is the head of the Department of Islamic Studies and the Director of the Zakir Husain Institute of Islamic Studies at the Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi. Editor of three Islamic journals, and member of numerous Muslim committees and organisastions, he is the author of numerous books on issues related to Islam and Muslims. Excerpts:

Q: In pre-Partition late nineteenth and twentieth century India, the Muslim middle-class played a key role in providing leadership to the Indian Muslims in various spheres. This is in contrast to the situation, today. How do you account for this?

A: The Revolt of 1857 was a disaster as far as the Indian Muslims were concerned, and so was the Partition in 1947. But it also saw the emergence and development of the modern Muslim middle class, which proved to be a powerful motor for social change. This was best represented by Sir Syed Ahmad Khan and the movement that he spawned. Not all of those who were influenced by, or agreed with, him on the need for modern education agreed with his pro-British politics. Indeed, some of them were forceful champions of both modern education as well as Indian independence. Raja Mahendra Pratap, head of the first Indian government in exile, was from the Aligarh school, as were other confirmed anti-imperialists such as Hasrat Mohani, Syed Mahmud, Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan, and the Ali brothers. It is true that many Aligarhians were vociferous supporters of the Muslim League and its Pakistan demand, but there were many others who were with the Congress and even with the Communist Party as well.

It was not just in politics that this new Muslim middle class, largely a product of Syed Ahmad Khan's Aligarh school, played a key role. It also made a powerful impact in the fields of literature, culture, and economic development.

But, with the Partition things changed drastically. It led to an exodus of a large section of the Indian Muslim middle-class that had been a crucial motor for social change to Pakistan. Their vested economic interests had made them firm backers of the Pakistan scheme, because they felt that there they would face no competition from the Hindus.

Partition was nothing short of a tragedy of momentous proportions for the Muslims, not just of India but of Pakistan as well. The Muslims who were left behind in India faced three choices. Firstly, they could forfeit all their rights since, as right-wing Hindutva forces argued, with the creation of Pakistan they had 'got their due'. Secondly, they could have the rights of 'tenants' as concessions, which is to say they could live in India but not be co-owners of it and would have no role in its development, because it 'belonged' to others. Thirdly, they could be equal citizens, with the same rights and duties as other Indians. This third view was, and still is, we must recognize, shared by a large number of Hindus. Indeed, the Indian Constitution gave numerous guarantees to all its minorities, including Muslims. This, we must never forget, was possible only in India. Despite all the provocations of the Hindutva forces and the opposition of some Hindus, the Indian leadership did not agree to declaring India a Hindu state, although it could easily have done that as a reaction to the creation of a so-called 'Islamic' Pakistan.

Q: But my question was about the role of the Muslim middle-class in providing leadership to the community at large.

A: I am coming to that point. In post-47 India, Muslims were faced with a unique predicament, one that they had never faced before. They were not a ruling community, but nor were they a ruled community. Rather, they were, in theory, co-rulers, along with other communities. This new status, which they had never enjoyed before, demanded a new sort of community leadership.

Our leaders have a host of issues to tackle, some of which they have failed to address at all. One of these is the lamentable level of Muslim representation in various government services. There is an urgent need for the government to turn its attention to this. It must also do away with the discriminatory provisions that deny Muslim (and Christian) Dalits Scheduled Caste status. Today, Muslim youth want to have their share in the country's development. They want to participate in the task of building the country. When you speak to government officials, they will tell you that Muslims have all the freedom to do so, but the ground realities are quite different. The Indian Muslims are like the twelfth player in a cricket team, who is kept simply as a 'reserve'. He is part of the team but is not brought out onto the field along with the other eleven players. He simply sits in the dressing room in the stadium. The Indian Muslim is like that. He is forced to sit in a corner. Ignored, indeed shunned, he spends his time praying that at least one of the eleven players gets hurt so that he can then be called into the field where he can display his talent and make his team win.

But, the point is, we Indian Muslims are no longer willing to be non-playing or 'reserve' players in the process of building our country. We demand to be included in the team. And, whenever and wherever we have been included, we have proven our mettle beyond any shade of doubt.

Q: To come back to my question, how do you think that the marginalization of the modern Muslim middle-class in the wake of the Partition, especially in north India, where the bulk of the Indian Muslims live, impacted on the nature of the Indian Muslim community leadership?

A: The vacuum created by the exodus of a sizeable section of the north Indian Muslim feudal and middle class was filled by the ulema of the traditional madrasas. Many of these ulema, particularly a large number of Deobandis, had forcefully opposed the Partition. They condemned the Pakistan scheme and the so-called 'two-nation theory' it was based on as un-Islamic. They were passionate advocates for a united India. Following the Partition, they sought to lead the community. They were also the only forces who were able to do so, as they had a strong base among the Muslim masses. The first task they were faced with was to set aside the fears of the Muslims who remained behind in India, to persuade them not to migrate to Pakistan, to rehabilitate tens of thousands who had been displaced in the violence in the wake of the Partition, and to help them build bridges with the rest of the Indian society. This task they did with considerable success, despite the grave odds they faced. One has only to go through the records of the Jamiat ul-Ulema-i Hind in the late 40s and early 50s to see how valiantly these ulema struggled to do all this.

Another issue of immense concern to the Muslims who stayed behind in India after the Partition were the threats to their religious and cultural identity and their religious institutions. The ulema gave a great deal of attention to this vital task. This is something that we just cannot ignore. We cannot ignore the immense sacrifices the ulema made at such a critical juncture in our history. It would be uncharitable to ignore all of this.

Different periods of history have their own requirements and their own priorities. So, from the mid-1960s onwards, you have the emergence of a different set of people who sought to lead the Muslims, including many non-ulema. Many of their demands were also different. This process was reflected, for instance, in the short-lived experiment of the Muslim Majlis, led by Dr. Faridi. At the same time, Hyderabad witnessed the growing influence of the Majlis-e Ittihadul Muslimeen, again a largely non-ulema Muslim formation. This was a time when the Muslims were coming out of their ghettos, less encumbered by the burden of the Partition that had been thrust on them. They were no longer mesmerized by the Congress, which had failed to protect their interests and even their lives.

Q: And what about today? How do you see the role of the Muslim middle-class in terms of leading the community in various fields?

A: The Muslim middle-class in western and southern India is way ahead of its counterpart in the north. In western and southern India, middle-class Muslims are providing a more progressive, socially-engaged and socially-relevant form of leadership. They have set up a large number of institutions for a variety of purposes. Opportunities to do so exist in other parts of the country, but the initiative for doing so is less marked. And, then, the state also often does not provide enough such opportunities. In many places, it prefers to build police stations rather than schools in Muslim localities.

Today, even in 'backward' north India, there is a visible demand for modern education among Muslims. In a sense, this was a consequence of the destruction of the Babri Masjid in 1992, when Muslims were forced to realize that their extreme backwardness on the educational front had rendered them weak and ineffective, bereft of influence in the corridors of power. If you go to any Muslim ghetto today, you will be surprised at the number of Muslim-run 'convent' or so-called 'English-medium' schools that flourish there. Some people quickly dismiss them as 'teaching-shops' of woeful quality. Admittedly, their standards may be low and may leave much to be desired, but, then, from quantity comes quality in due course. As a minority, we must strive even harder than others to achieve quality in our institutions, for only then will we gain the respect of others. And only then, of course, can we survive and thrive in the market, which is now characterized by such fierce competition.

Q: What, in your view, should be the main issues that Muslim leaders should concentrate on?

A: Economic and educational advancement should be top priorities of the emerging Muslim leadership. This does not, however, mean that we should ignore politics. Rather, we must be politically active, but in a sensible way. We can't, and shouldn't, go it alone in the political sphere. We have to work with others for common interests and concerns. Even on the issue of countering Islamophobia and the targeting of Muslims, it has been found that brave non-Muslim activists, such as Teesta Setalvad and Manisha Sethi (both women) can be better spokespeople for Muslims than many of our so-called leaders.
 

On this let me add a point that we tend not to think about. Just as non-Muslim fellow Indians like Teesta and Manisha and many others are struggling for justice to Muslims, we Muslims, too, must raise our voice for, and work for and with, non-Muslims who face similar problems—Dalits, workers, Adivasis, and so on. Our leadership must not remain obsessed with specifically 'Muslim' issues, very narrowly defined. We need to wholeheartedly participate in movements on general issues, issues that affect everyone, as well as in the movements of other marginalized people. Only then can we be in a position to give, rather than just take. Only then can we win the respect and regard of others. We can't keep demanding things and not helping others, or even ourselves. We have to recognize the urgent need to be much more inclusive and open.

Our Muslim organizations also need to be much more professional than they are. They cannot afford to carry on being individual-centric or starkly sectarian. The feudal ethos that characterizes most them is really appalling.


That said, I can somewhat understand why Muslim organizations tend to focus solely on Muslim-specific issues, although I do not condone this attitude. If your own house is on fire and our own life is under threat, you are simply unable to help others even if you want to. You can't expect me to come rushing to douse the flames engulfing your house if my house, too, is on fire.

Q: What do you feel about the Muslim media's role, if at all, in promoting a more relevant and progressive Muslim leadership?

A: It has done precious little at all in this regard. It has remained confined only to Muslim issues and has an impact only on some sections of the Muslims themselves. It does not have a wider, cross-community appeal or influence. Often, Muslim papers serve as vehicles for the personal economic and political interests of their owners and editors.

Q:
And what about Muslim elected representatives in the Parliament and state assemblies?

A: On the whole, they do not appear very vocal about Muslim issues. Maybe this is because they are bound to follow the whip of their political parties. They cannot be called 'Muslim' leaders unless they are elected from exclusively Muslim constituencies, and even then they would themselves not, and indeed should not, claim that they represent Muslims alone. We do, however, have a new breed of Muslim political leaders who might be able to play a more meaningful role in highlighting issues that concern Muslims—people such as Omar Abdullah, Mahmooda Mufti, Salman Khurshid, Rashid Alavi, Haroon Yusuf and so on. I don't expect or advocate that they should come on one platform and concern themselves solely with Muslim issues. After all, they are meant to respond to their constituencies, which include non-Muslims, too. However, I feel they should have a common minimum programme for the Muslim community across party lines. This programme should be based on the understanding that India's interests coincide with those of its Muslim citizens and that as long as Muslims remain backward the country as a whole cannot advance as it should.

Q: How do you account for the fact that while the ulema (despite their limitations) are deeply involved in community issues, middle-class Muslims (notable exceptions notwithstanding) are not?

A: Our university-educated Muslims are so engrossed in their own personal issues and concerns that they simply don't have any time for others. I think this seriously needs to be critiqued and changed. They, too, must be actively involved in community affairs, instead of leaving this task just to the ulema and some self-appointed Muslim politicians. I think universities such as the Aligarh Muslim University and the Jamia Millia Islamia must play a leading role in this regard. Their researchers must seriously study Muslim issues, to come up with prescriptions and to dialogue with agencies of the state and civil society groups. This is something that they have, I must say, largely failed to do.

Q: The lament is often heard that the ulema and modern-educated Muslim leaders and others are divided by a yawning gulf and that this dualism is a major problem that urgently needs to be solved. This is said to be one of the principal factors for the absence of a proper community leadership. What do you feel about this?

A: I think this issue of the divide between the 'old' and the 'new' systems of knowledge, represented by two different sets of leaders, is becoming increasingly irrelevant today. This is a very heartening development. We need both forms of education and both types of leaders. We need religious as well as modern education, because Islam is not just about the Hereafter. Rather, it gives equal stress to the this-world or duniya. As the Prophet Muhammad remarked, the world is the field of the Hereafter. This is to say, one will sow in the Hereafter what one reaps in this world. Islam stresses both worship (ibadat) and social affairs (muamilat).

The notion that in Islam there is a rigid distinction between 'religious knowledge' (ilm-e din) and 'worldly knowledge' (ilm-e duniya) is wholly tenable. It is the product of the period of Muslim decline. Admittedly, it has ruined us. The only distinction that Islam countenances in knowledge is between what is 'useful' (nafe) and 'useless' (ghair nafe). So insistent was the Prophet Muhammad that his followers should gain proper education that he even offered to release non-Muslim prisoners of war, taken in the aftermath of the battle of Badr, if they educated those of his followers who were illiterate, Now, these were no ordinary non-Muslims. Rather, they were fierce enemies of Islam and the Prophet, who had waged war against them. Obviously, not only did they know nothing about Islam, they were wholly against Islam. Naturally, therefore, what they taught the illiterate Muslims was not the Quran or the Hadith, but worldly knowledge, or what we today call 'secular' knowledge. So, if the Prophet considered this sort of knowledge perfectly legitimate, how can it be considered impermissible?

Let me end this by mentioning the Quranic story of the creation of Adam. When God told the angels that he was going to create Adam, the angels, who otherwise were always obedient to Him, objected. He asked them to explain the names of things, but they could not. However, Adam did so. Then, God ordered the angels to bow down before Adam. Accordingly, the rule was established that those who do not know must always defer to those who do. God decided this on the very day Adam was created. This is why till Muslims 'knew', till they embraced and promoted all forms of useful knowledge, others respected them. But, ever since they stopping 'knowing' and began wallowing in ignorance, they were forced to be subordinate to others. So, if today Muslims find themselves bowing before others, it is their own fault for having abandoned the pursuit of knowledge.

Hence, we must stop blaming others for all our ills and realize that for much of our present sorry plight we are ourselves responsible. The point, therefore, is that the pursuit of knowledge, including what is called 'secular' knowledge is indispensable if we Muslims are to drag ourselves from out of the morass we find ourselves stuck in today—not just in India, but all across the globe.
 



Yoginder Sikand works with the

Centre for the Study of Social Exclusion at the National Law School, Bangalore

 

 

 

__._,_.___
 

Friday, April 9, 2010

Shakil Ahmed Khan


A tribute to Shakil saheb by Zubair Irshad

Shakil Ahmed Khan defeated by death this morning (April 7, 2010)
I still remember when I first met Shakil Ahmed Khan in 2008 during PMP seminar organized by JMI Alumni in Dubai.


The man with white beard, sharp eyes, impressive voice & intellectual mind was more than enough to impress any one.
I wasn’t aware that one day I will be working with him.
While working for a consultancy in Abu dhabi, affected by world economic crisis in 2009, I got a call from him to come & meet.
He asked me to provide me of my knowledge of project management to his company Scantec international during weekend.
I agreed & went back to Abu dhabi till I got another call from him to leave everything & join his team urgently.
I pause for a while because there was a huge difference between working in a consultancy & suddenly leave it to join a contractor specialized in a different field!
On his insistence I agreed.
This was the first time when I got an opportunity to face him on daily basis.
I found him younger than me when it comes to energy level & thirst for work.
I used to sit, watch & listen carefully to whatever he used to say as every word came out from his mouth contain knowledge, compassion for work & determination to achieve anything fruitful.
It was the first time I met a person who almost hate the word “impossible”.
The project was a real mess & company has failed miserably on financial ground, but he was determined to take everything back from the jaws of defeat, not because he wants money!
Because he wants to safeguard the financial interest of other people who trusted him.
Suffering from multiple illness, hyper on various issues all of a sudden, saddened by the attitude of people he trusted but faith in ALLAH & his hard work to regain everything back, was the main motive of his hard work at the age of 70+.
He shared many secrets with me & many times his pain came out from his eyes, he try to wipe them out but I can read what actually was there!
I have seen the fighter who has won many battles in his life but struggling right in front of me because of the misuse of his generosity by many.
I remember, he used to say…..
Shakil khan will never run away, he will remain there to work like he used to work before, so that, even if he died then people if not say then to admit that he died while working for others.
I have seen him laughing, shouting, negotiating, counseling & crying.
He was the victim of his own, a person hardly understood but manipulated by many.
He mentioned to me more than once about Jalil bhai, the only person I think he respect too much.
His pain for Jalil bhai was prominent because Jalil bhai was the reason of his entry in UAE & he blames himself for being unlucky for him.
He went up in his career because of him & Jalil bhai came down & lost many things because of him.
He was un doubtfully an authority to his work & well known person in Dubai when it comes to power transmission lines for many years before taking a dip.
Due to high sugar I advice him to bring something light from home to eat as junk food may further spoil his health.
He used to bring apple/pear & a sandwich but he never forgets to offer me one piece of apple & some time half of the sandwich, whether iam there or not on my seat.
It is nothing but shows how much he cares for those he loves.
He was proud of his son & daughter because both have exceeds his expectation & still was there when he needs them.
He has lived his life according to him, most of the time at his terms & conditions, seen many things in life but what he was into is the worse phase.
He said this not because of difficulty level but because of his falling health & uncertainty.
He used to shout & tell many employees that if he is there, they can hope, if he dies then forget everything.
I had no doubt in what he said because we all were fighting a lost battle since dues become enormous & there was no sign of payment from Nakheel as one of the biggest problem.
He was honest in his deal, straight in his words but some time his pause while talking made me realize that he knows the fact but hiding from all so that his team shouldn’t give up.
He was generous in giving & that was his fault as the world has another approach for such kind people.
He was the victim of his generosity, straightforwardness & outspoken nature.
He was very positive approach to achieve results as he always won & wanted to win.
He gifted me two of his books (The inheritance & Ghibah,back biting) & was working on his third book “time management” & wasn’t aware of the truth that he is running of time.
I spend hours & hours listening to him till 18.01.10 before went to Abu Dhabi once again.
I spoke to him on telephone many times since after & emails too.
The last email I sent on 06.04.10 & was expecting a reply early in the morning when I get a call about his demise.
Was saddened by this news as I know the fighter lost the battle this time.
It will be very difficult for me to forget him as he will always remain alive in my heart.