Unjustifiable Muslim Anger On Waqf: Will Take Time To Subside

This is about a conversation I had with a Muslim friend from my earlier days, following the passage of the Waqf Bill by both houses of Parliament. I used to think he could be argued upon despite him being a devout Muslim. I've never opposed any devout Muslim-in fact, I envy their belief. But I've always stood against someone pushing forward a radical argument guided by faith.
Straightway into the conversation I had:

H stands for Him and M stands for Me

H: Hi! You must be very happy now.
M: Why?

H: Tumlog Muslims ke itna khilaf ho ki ab unki Sampatti pe kabja karne ka plan bana liya hai (You people are so much opposed to Muslims that now you have devised ways to capture their property).

M: Who told you this? Have you read my article on the Waqf issue? Please read it. Then you would know the reality.

H: You people find faults only with Muslims. How can Hindus be members of our religious institutions?

M: I can explain every issue to you, but first, you must know what you want to ask. You are being misguided by vested interests.

M: I am sending you some of the videos where some Muslim leaders are actually welcoming the Waqf Bill.

H: What you are sending is confirmation bias. You are only sending what suits you.

M: I cannot argue against emotion. If you want to argue on facts, I am ready. But first, frame your issues so that I can give you clarification. And yes, do read my article.

H: You are a Modi Bhakt. And you have been the spokesperson of the BJP that spreads hate. Why should I read your article.

M: Don't discuss me. Let us discuss the issues.

H: The country is now unlivable for Muslims. You people will destroy all mosques and qabragaahs (graveyards).

M: You are wrong. But anything that has been done illegally must be stopped. The government cannot allow the illegal occupation of the land of others. Whether temples or mosques, all should be brought down if constructed on the properties of others.

H: This means you agree that mosques will be destroyed. You are exposed. You will do good as a spokesperson of BJP. But you cannot get my support.

The conversation was shocking for me as I never believed this friend of mine from a humble background would have this perspective on issues that are going to benefit members of his community. I recalled Karl Marx and his statement on religion, the one where he talks about 'Religion being the opium of the masses'. Although he had spoken about it in a different context, the feeling of persecution based on religious belief blinds one's critical faculty.

This only proved to me beyond doubt that vested interests in the community, the mullahs and the illegal occupants of Waqf properties have hijacked the minds of the laity. The government and well-meaning people would have to do a lot of things to remove cobwebs and enable them to see the brighter side. Perhaps, just like Triple Talaq, the benefits of the new Waqf provisions would be appreciated after they come into action.

People are normally resistant to change. Even the benefactors appear to be tormentors. Thought leaders, scientists and revolutionaries have been sent to the gallows for speaking the truth. Science says the Earth is round. But many still believe that it is flat. Therefore, I say you cannot argue against emotion. I generally don't argue if people give glottal reactions based on beliefs.

The new Waqf Act is a strong statement that illegal acts cannot be allowed to be perpetrated in the name of appeasement. Waqf is a pious act which is created in the name of Allah for the benefit of the community. Although it is created due to religious reasons, the Waqf itself is not a part of the Islamic religious belief system. Its maintenance and well-being fall under the secular head.

Hindus would be members of the Waqf Boards and the Waqf Council to oversee the management. The membership is mere tokenism since the majority would still be Muslims. Expertise and checks and balances are a must to ensure that the system is transparent and delivers justice.

Who can oppose representation to Muslim women, other sects of Islam and members of backward castes among Muslims in such Boards and Councils? And I am baffled at those who say Hindus would occupy the lands of Muslims. This would happen only if you are still governed by the old ideology where the claim of the Waqf over any property was absolute. There is the law of the land that decides legitimacy. Those who fear are the ones who justify illegal occupation.

The country must move towards a situation where the law is supreme. Religious beliefs and practices cannot come in the way of constitutional rights. Issues would be decided based on what is right and what is wrong, and discussed and argued in full public view. Parliament, which is a representative body, has discussed every issue in detail. The Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) that looked into each aspect in detail heard arguments from all sections of society. Some of the recommendations were incorporated too.

So what is the fuss all about then? Most people (Hindus) who are thriving on an easy lease of Waqf properties to them due to manipulation will oppose the government and support the vested interests. "The community is in danger" is the argument that sells well, more so with those who easily get misguided by their religious and thought leaders seeped in persecution complex.

Way back in 2006, the Sachar Committee that looked into reasons of backwardness of the Muslim community, had observed that the revenue from Waqf properties should be around Rs 12,000 crore in place of Rs 100 plus crore. Image what would be the revenue today. And the beneficiaries would be the poor among the Muslims.

India is the safest country for Muslims as it is governed by the Constitution. And what forms the very backbone is the fact that we argue and debate, and not resort to attacking others over differing opinions.