Political parties are intent upon appeasing the Mullahcracy only, none of them are well wishers of the muslim masses.

Left front government in the state are earning the displeasure of all classes of population, excluding the burgeosie. Muslims are no exception, in reality, their sense of deprivation has commenced much earlier. Sachar report has added to the disgust.In an attempt to mitigate the distrust and disgust, the left front have taken a few faltering steps, recently. Some other steps were perceptible earlier too, in the name of upliftment of muslims. But are the LF really sincere, do they desire muslim upliftment? The steps said to have been taken, and those programmes announced in this regard, when subjected to scrutiny, incurs grave doubt as to the ultimate utility of such programmes in the cause for which they are reportedly designed.

Let us survey the earlier steps in this regard. Principal steps are: (1) Proscribing books by Taslima Nasreen; (2) Preventing Taslima from reading out her poetry in a cultural get together at Medinipur (3) Preventing Taslimafrom inaugurating a book fair at Siliguri; (4) Banish Taslima from Calcutta; (5) Elevate the Kolkata Aliya Madrasa to Alia University; (6) Formation of a separate Madrasa Service Comission etc. New bunch of programmes, that our kind(?) government has taken in hand are, (a) Bringing unrecognised 400 madrasas in to recognised category; (b) establish 300 new madrasas; (c)Establishment of 300 madrasa training centres; (d) Introduction of “Fazil” course in 10 senior madrasas; etc. Very large budgetery grants have been provided for funding these, in the current year.

It does not merit reiteration, how inhuman and undemocratic and reproachable the steps taken by the government in respect of Taslima. There is no scope of any doubt or misunderstanding, that the steps are for paliating and appeasing the mullahcracy, and have no contribution in the upliftment of the muslim have nots. Elevation of Alia madrasa into the label of Alia University is also for the satiation of demand by mullahcracy. Madrasa education board and the creation of such institution suffers the same label. These last two concessions have been conceded for the pleasure of muslim fundamentalists, exclusively- and these make no impact on the toiling and struggling masses. Formation of the Alia University has not been planned with prior infrastructure, and no provision exists to impart modern education. Thus, Alia madrasa's conversion into Alia University renders no special benefit, except for the fact, that more and more people may find encouragement in obtaining religious instruction and thus inflate the number of unemployables in modern industry and commerce and inflate the number of mullahcracy, and the creation of a new class of oppressors in the name of religion. The formation of the Madrasa Service Comission, will also serve the same end and the bulk of the muslim masses will be made to carry a larger burden of social parasites. It is perceived, that a very small fraction of youth may benefit, but the lowering the standard of education will debilitate the society, further. It is known, that higher education is scarce amongst the muslims, (graduates-only 3%), thus getting to fill madrasa teachers will be difficult. Last year, all vacant positions could not be filled, due to paucity of suitable candidates. Therefore, formation of madrasa service comission, will harm the muslim society, rather than helping it.

Professed extensive project in expansion of madrasa education of the left front government will be a precursor to the generation of extreme disadvantage of the muslim community, in stead of benefit. The reason is that, the madrasa education is a relic of the dark middle ages. This system appears to enforce a belief, that, sum total of all knowledge was delivered, and the knowledge bank was complete, when the last trip of Gibreel was over. Subsequent fourteen centuries have shown no advancement of knowledge. Sun still sets in a muddy pond(Al-Kahf, 18:86), further, “We had encompassed [all] that he had in knowledge (Al-Kahf, 18:91).Worldwide backwardness of the muslim community may safely be deemed to have arisen from the community's adherence to madrasa education system. Madrasa education consists of impartation of religious education and this system is against modern education. This system is a great barrier to the progress and advancement of the muslim community. This confirms our premonition, that, the attempt at emphasizing madrasa education is aimed, solely at the satiation and paliation of the mullahcracy, to aid increase of their tribe, and is not designed for the progress and development of the muslim community at large. This is further designed to keep the community away from the mainstream of the world's progress.

Muslim participation in government services is woefully low. In this state, it is even lower than the national average, which is poor enough. Muslim fundamentalists, of course, propagate, that, the indifference of the governments is responsible for this.This assertion is not correct. Participation in higher education, by muslims is abysmally low, which is the main reason for this low incidence of muslim employment in government services. Table, below,showing students in education, will prove:

Year 2001 %Muslim %SC/ST %Other castes

Primery 50.30 54.40 80.40

eightth class 26.0 29.90 ( ?)

Madhyamic 11.90 13.10 38.00

Graduate 03.0 03.50 32.40

Muslim fundamentalists hold the government, specially, the left front government for this crass backwardness of the community. Many of the muslim society also share this canard. But, truth to tell, the muslim backwardness is universal. Thus, any government indifference cannot be the cause of this. Deep self analysis and self criticism is necessary to locate the genuine reasons for this universal malady. Development of human society, and progress calls for progressive thought, adoption of modern thought and education, and admit the social developments and scientific thought and follow these modern precepts. The muslim society has been captivated in ancient Shariatic thought and precepts, turning their back on modernism, and progress. That this retrogressive stance, is the creation of mullahcracy, needs not be reiterated. It is for the development of mullahcracy, that the muslim society is in the blind alley of sharia laws,sharia culture and shariatic education, and perpetuation of this maze is created by madrasa education. They have been at it since long.Let's examine their past performance, the mullahcracy's.

They had declared 'black' fatwa in British India, against introduction of modern education. In 1826,1829 and in 1837, few muslim thought leaders attempted introduction of english education in the Alia Madrasa. Strong opposition of the mullahs, this was prevented.In 1826, the Alia Madrasa first introduced a medical college-Mullahcracy strongly opposed and nipped it in the bud. Muslim fundamentalists declared fatwa, insisting that education with “human skeleton” is contra to shariat. They had dubbed the project of initiating a medical college, at Alia madrasa, as a British conspiracy against Islam. The “jihad” declared against modern education, by the then clergy of islam, is continued by their inheritors. They still are shrill in demanding expansion of retrogressive madrasa education and in dislocating modern education for the muslim masses.

The brotherhood of mullahs and Muftis, solelyresponsible for the damage to the genius of the muslims, are funnily enough, the loudest in accusing governments of indifference and consequent backwardness of the muslim community.These religious leaders are now demanding job reservation for muslims.This is a very sensitive issue, and it influences the muslim community. But this militates against the principle of secularism and humanistic ideals, and is likely to benefit an infinitesimal section of the community. 25.2% of the population of the state are muslims,containing 3% graduates, even total employment of all graduates in government jobs, will amount to what advancement of the muslim community? If job reservation is announced in proportion to population, could the muslim community provide candidates to all such positions? Hence the 'jihad' against modern education, actively pursued by the mullahs and their claim for proportional job reservation are contrary acts and absurd. This dichotomy is nothing but deception to the masses and specially, the muslim community. Since almost the founding of Islam, such dichotomy and deception has been rampant.

The role of left front government is qually deceptive. It has been, earlier, shown, how the government complied with the demands of the mullahs,successively. Strangely enough, this self same government claims, that, in the whole country, they are the sole muslim friendly, sympathetic entity! The relationship between mullahcracy and the muslim society are dialectic. The left front are apparently strengthening the mullahcracy. Mullahs want religious education, the society needs modern education; Mullahs demand undemocratic muslim personal law,like polygamy,easy talaq etc. While the masss demand reform; mullahs want that women be interned at home and in Hijab, the society opines against; Mullahs want to rule in the name of Allah,and exclusive islam(with themselves as interpreters and enforcers) while the society calls for democracy and multiculturism. In every aspect of life is the contrariness expnding. Left front is consistently, partial and supportive to the mullahs, some times overt, sometimes covert, sometimes silently, sometimes loudly. But their specious unsubstantiated claim is that they work fervently and constantly in favour of the benefit of the minorities. This is crass deception to the muslims. Given genuine desire of upliftment of the muslim self-inflicted backwardness, the government could have done a lot. This dissertation is not meant to enumerate them. But, in the field of higher education, the neglect and damage suffered by the students of the community, and the scope of help, the government could have offered, can be briefly viewed. Mullahcracy's drag of the society against higher education has already been discussed, but the indifference of the government has accentuated this disadvantage, manifolds, through government indifference.Financial inadequacy, hasrendered it difficult for the muslim students using non-resident education, staying in hostels. But, fact remains, that, the number of institurions of higher learning, are few and far between in muslim populated areas. The subject of muslim students hostel is a street less travelled than any, and less said about it the better. Amongst the muslims in West Bengal, 40% are domiciled in Murshidabad, Maldah and north Dinajpur districts. In these three districts, the muslims represent 63.7%, 49.7% and 47.4% respectively, of the total population. Compared to the other districts, these three districts have been denied access to education from primery to university levels, in an unprecedented manner. This matter has been dealt with, in a detailed manner, in my article,'Left front regime in West Bengal appeased the Mullahcracy,consequently, the muslims have not only been deprived but also deceived'. The apathy of the government in providing modern education facilities in muslim populated areas, the wilful discrimination and neglect has shrunk, the already scarce avenues of progress, opportunities of the muslim populace.In this state, reservation of seats for higher education are 34% (SC-22%, ST-6%, OBC-6%). The government, in stead of broadening avenues for higher education for muslims, are lavishing grants for establishment of more and more new madrasaa, which will further shrink avenues for enlightenment through modern education and thus restrict their employability.The government appears to be bringing on this disaster willingly on the muslims. The policy of the government apparently consists of appeasing and stoking the hold of mullahcracy on the muslims, and NOT upliftment and progress of the community in bringing them into the mainstream of the nation. Prevalent maxim seems to confirm the principle, that, “a contented mullahcracy will railroad the muslim votes into the left ballot box”. This is a fallacious principle, but the left front leadership is chasing this mirage to self destruction and dragging the muslims along.

It is idle to attribute this falacy on left front alone, the opposition, too, are frantic about satiating the mullahcracy. The maxim is- “ whatever you can do-I can do better”. A meanminded competition is perceptible, in comparative appeasement of mullahcracy between the ruling and the opposition parties. The opposition is curiously silent, when the rulers pile up undemocratic,inhuman torture on tasleema. Muslim fundamentalists had unleashed vandalism at the residence of Morselim, in protest against an article published by him, callet “Satyamithyya”. The editor of the host of the article had also been visited by the same misfortune. Government failed to provide protection against this mayhem and violence, nor did the perptrators riceive retribution. Opposition was conspicuously silent and inactive. Further, a communal organisation, like Madrasa Chhatra Sangathan, in their public function, found Kum. Mamata Bannerjee, gracing the podium. Imam of Tipu Sultan Masjid, Maulana Noor Muhammad Barkati almost always sprouts communal poison. He had publicly declared fatwa urging the killing of Tasleema. He was found to have added glamour to the platform where Mamata devi was offering “Dharna”. These spectacles left the left front and SUCI free from reaction. All these facts demonstrate the confirmation of the feeling, that the “Real programme of all political parties is the paliation and appeasement of mullahcracy, to ensure muslim votes, and that, none of them are real friends and benefactors of the muslims”

Islam is not founded upon equity and fair play but on inequity and discrimination

Claims are made that Islam is the best of religions. This claim loses its sanctity when concurrently claims are made of its being the 'right' religion. Questions arise as to what is the basis of such assertion, about comparative goodness or its being the 'right' one. Assertions are made, that islam is the only one created by GOD, how can this be universally appreciated- this being the mental frame or faith of an individual. To accentuate palatability, Islam is reported to be the religion of equity,peace, tolerance and forgiveness. Other faiths do not contain these humanistic virtues at all and islam abounds in it; QED Islam is the right and best of religions.

Concatenation of the qualities enumerated above in any belief, faith or religion can certainly earn epithet 'best' certainly.If islam exhibits the assembly of qualities then no reason can be found to avoid award of the “Best” epithet amongst all forms of faith, belief or religion. Do these attributes really abound in islam? In an article, of this dimension, analysis of attribute by attribute concurrently by religion by religion is not feasible. We shall proceed to discover the extent to which Islam contains all or some of these attributes.

To our intellect, it was Carl Marx and Fred Engels who pioneered the concept of “equality” to the mankind. Some, however, dispute this and claim that it was Muhammad who discovered the idea if equality and propounded the theory and introduced effectively in the religion propounded by him- Islam. Marx & Engels plagiarised the thought from Islam. This is fantastic. Our discussion is presence or otherwise of equality and equity in islam. Casual acquaintance and perusal may look confirmatory to the suggestion. Because this religion does not differentiate caste or creed and some personal examples set by the prophet may mislead one into thinking that “equality” is identifiable. Current Muslim society is rampant with social and ecumenical differences and differences of interpretation of “true islam, but pristine islam was devoid of this. All mussalman were equal before Allah—rich or poor, freeman or slave,of high birth or low,learned or illiterate, wise or dislexic, respected or not, Allah did not appear to have discriminated.The individual, whom the Allah chose to declare as the last messenger and finest speciman of humanity was a destitute and unlettered. In the annals of islam and history of islam Bilal and Osama son of Jayd, have found respectable mention. The prophet nominated the first as Muazzem, a person originally a slave. A muazzem is entrusted with calling the faithful to prayer and is an esteemable office.Sahabees( close associates of Muhammad) did have persons well endowed with worldly goods and who were high in eminence, in preference to whom elevation of a former slave to muazzemhood created a precedence indicating erasure of disequality amongst followers.Jayed was a slave, whom muhammad liberated and adopted as a son. The son of that, Jayed, Osama was appointed commander of the army against Syria. Specially eminent persons like Abu Bakr,Omar Faruq, osman Ghani,Ali, persons who subsequently became Khalifa, were instructed to fight under the leadership of Osama, thereby creating an unprecedented instance of daring, and a message of erasure of social discrimination. Social discrimination between unmarried and widowed women prevalent in some faiths, Islam does not recognise the difference. Of the 22 wives of Muhammad( there are no accurate statistic of spouses of muhammad), 21 were widows. Equating the respect for virgins and widows do surely represent egalitarian sentiment of his faith.In many societies entry into places of worship, have restrictive regulations, whites and non-white discrimination is too well known to bear repetition.In Islam, any person can become Imam. Ram an incarnation of God in Hindu mythologyhad shot an arrow to kill a chandal's son for the sin of studying the vedas. Eklavya, a scion of inferior caste had to sacrifice his thumb as preceptor fee for having learnt archery, to which, the then custom did not permit, for protecting the reputation of the preceptor's favorite high caste student,Arjuna. In islam, however, any man can be maulana, mufti, hafez or quarri.In the social melieu, muhammad did introduce customs and had taken steps, which can be construed as egalitarian. In soite of all these, Islam has failed to secure the recognition of being an egalitarian institution, in the social history, though, there are persons who claim loudly from the house top to register such a nomenclature. The Umma have never attempted to discover and analyse the reasons, which led to such lack of universal recognition.These thought leaders attributed the indifference to religious bigotry of those professing other faith and belief, and argued the lack of liberalism and dogmatism of others. This assertion arose out of blind dogmatic adherence to their own faith, and is fundamentally flawed.If religious regulation are designed to benefit mankind and development of humanity, then comparative bigotry alone cannot preponderate continuoussly,recognition must necessarily ensue. Islam and its egalitarian message has failed to attract universal admiration is not due to dogmatic bigotry of other faith followers, but there are three main contributory reasons. (1) Islamic egalitarianism is not universal but seriously discriminatory. (2) Islamic egalitarianis is heavily supportive to the economically advantaged and is silent on methods of neutralising effects arising out of the economic discrimination. (3) Islam has enhanced gender discrimination and accentuated the male domination of society. In addition, there are many other incidents and tenets in scripture and Muhmmad's life style, which do not exhibit traces of egalitarian thought and sentiment. In the contrary, exposes an image of inequality with great severity. On a casual examination, Islam may exhibit a few semblance of egalitarianism, but in reality, such is not bourne out. Appearence at casual examination and the error arising out of such a study will be violently dispelled by a deeper consideration. Egalitarianism calls for erasure of all discrimination and distance amongst humanity, providing equal rights and opportunities of livelihood and living, dispensing impartial justice to all and total neutrality, equal respect to all among other rights. In short applicability of all rules and regulation should be totally uniform. Islam, on the contrary, fundamentally, creates a chasm in human thought, in stead of eliminating all devisive notions, and created two entitys-- Believers and non-believers! Those who believe in Allah and Rasool muhammad are 'believers' and the rest are 'non-believers. Islam provides for different dispensation for life on earth and afterlife for believers and non-believers. Allah has erected an impassable mountain, in Islam, between the believers and others. Islamic fraternalising is limited between believers and is not universal, in fact extremely exclusive. Islamic internationalism slogan is “Mussalmans of the world are brothers”, islam does not admit the possibility of intimacy between believers and non-believers. Allah is said to have informed, that non-believers cannot be friends to believers, they always crave evil on muslims. “O you who have believed, do not take as intimates those other than yourselves[i.e. believers], for they will not spare you[any] ruin. They wish you would have hardship. Hatred has already appeared from their mouths, and what their breasts conceal is greater (Ali Imran,3:118). A claim is often made, that islam is a religion of forgiveness, and Allah and His Rasool Muhammad are extremely kind and merciful. Allah's mercy and kindness is however, denied to the non-believers, eternally. Only mussalmans can seek Allah's mercy and hope to receive it, non muslims, never. Muhammad's show of kindness is stated to be exemplified by his extending perdon, after his conquest of Makka, to all those, who reportedly forced him out of Makka in the past. This claim is not bourne by facts. His extension of pardon was limited to those, who embraced islam, only. Quran confirms this. Quran states: “And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakat, let them[go] on their way(At Tawba, 9:5). A further Ayat: “But if they repent, establish prayer, and give zakat then they are your brothers in religion; and We detail the verses for a people who know(At Tawba,9:11).Both these Ayats were said to have been revealed after conquest of Makka. These two Ayats amply define that forgiveness is exclusively for mussalmans and others are not at all eligible..

Islam has no place for justice and impartial dispensation for all. Islam professes, that everybody will be judged in afteerlife after the Destruction(Quayamat). There are provision for two dispensations, Behast for some; Behast will have provision for each resident, all elements of enjoyment and entertainment, like heavenly virgin courtesaan, and surfiet of wines. Others will reside in Dozkh or Jahannum(hell or hades). Hell will have large fireplace and unlimited equipments of torture. On the last day,humanity will be classified in two lots: believers and nonbelievers, and all nonbelievers will be forthwith consigned to hell. However good their past earthly performance be, they will not be evaluated for such credits, because they have failed to place their belief on “Allah” and His acknowledged “Rasool”. This is the facad of socalled egalitarianism of Islam,where egalitarianism is devisive at the outset.

Economic difference in men are a human creation. States economic perception influences these discrimination. Consequently the gap between the rich and poor goes on increasing. Erasure of this hiatus and installation of egalitarianism and equality is impossible without basic change in the system of governance of the state. Islam has failed to provide any direction in the matter of creating economic egalitarianism.On the contrary, Islam declares that the disequality in economic status is Allah's creation and is said to be blessed by Him. Quran declares “Indeed, my Lord extends provision for whom He wills of His servants and restricts [it] for him (Saba,34:39).*{2:112 in bengali appears inappropriate-please check up}. Islam does not recommend protest by the downtrodden against the economic oppressors. The faithful are encouraged to ask assistance from Allah-because apparently his Eeman(faith in Him) is under test. Still claims are made by the apologists for islam, that islam is egalitarian! In what manner? Introduction of Zakat and partial abolition of slave system is held out as instances. Zakat is an important provision in islamic economic system. This regulation instructs every capable mussalman to donate two and a half percent of his accumulated wealth, every year, compulsorily. Money thus realised, was to have been beneficially spent for general benefit-- mainly for the welfare of the poor.This is kind of a relief for the poor. Additionally, there is a provision for “Fitra”, an economic programme, directed at assisting the poor.In this regulation, head of every muslim family is meant to donate a predesigned amount, per head (adult or underage), at or before the festival of Eid-ul-Fitr Namaz. A further provision concerns the sales proceeds of the hide of the sacrificed animals offered in Qurbany. This income is meant to be spent for benefit of the poor and some of it may be spent for madrasa education.

These relief programmes for the poor are well appreciated in human society. These programmes, in the upliftment of the poor were excellent precursors of similar schemes. A permnent crutch for relief can certainly not be considered as desirable as a prop. These superficial exposition of welfare have intrinsic negativity. A society, that perpetuates the coexistence of the ultra rich and the ultra poor, in which the haves will loll in extraordinery pleasure and wealth while the rest will drudge through existence depending on table scraps and hand outs, the poor who will perish in hunger, unclad and destitution, while the other will occasionally donate and live in a continuum of pleasure, cannot find approval in modern thought process. Zakat,Fitra may well have been appreciated as a forerunner of welfare, but as a permanent economic dispensation cannot be held in perpetuity. Muhammad's dispensation does not even touch the fringe of dreaming about an egalitarian society.Muhammad did not dream of a hunger-free human society, let us not mislead ourselves into atributing him as a precursor of an egalitarian society.

Slave system made its appearence at a juncture of the development of human society.Mankind was devided into serfs and freemen.In litteral terms, man was a slave or a purchaseable commodity.Human being could be bought, sold or killed like animals, like cattle and hunting animals.Slaves would be made to toil day and night. Extortion and oppression of man by man rose to its pinnacle, at that time. In the Arab society, at the time of advent of islam, the system, though in decay, but was in existence. In human perlance, the slave system was the most reprehensible measure, though in its early stage, this did contribute to progress. In several other societies, revolt and protest against the slave system was perceptible,the demand for abolishment of the system was gathering strength. Islamic protagonists claim, that, it was islam only, that raised its voice against slavery and abolished it. In reality, this claim is not capable of being sustained. True, Muhammad, personally,in some instance exhibited sympathy towards some slaves, but he never raised his voice against the system, on the other hand, evidence exists, that he supported the slave system and even approved it. Muhammad led many Jihads while propagating Islam. In the event of a conquest in jihad, there were prisoners of war, whom muhammad would render free against ransom only, or sold them for money as slaves, or even allow the followers to use them as captive productive labour, without pay and generate wealth. Utilisation of prisoner of war wemen in personal sexual gratification has been authorised by Quran. This will be shown later. Another Ayat provides “Allah is ever Knowing and Wise and whoever among you cannot [find] the means to marry free, believing women, then [he may marry] from those whom your right hand possess(An-Nisa, 4:25). Apparently, the thesis, that Muhammad was the precursor of ablition of slave system, is totally baseless- on the contrary, slave system was one of effective ammunition in extending the hegemony of islam. Male domination of society preceeded the advent of religion, much earlier. Male domination robbed rights of women, step by cruel step. 1400 yers ago, when, muhammad began propagating Islam, male domination of society was nearly at its peak. All religions, that appeared on the face of earth, have uniformly, enhanced the male domination in the name of god and consequently, the difference in status between men and women progressively disadvantaged the womenfolk.Their suffering and torture supplemented continuously. In the matter of male domination and whittling away of women's rights, Islam is in no way better than any other religion, on the contrary, it accentuated under Islam. Pre-islam, in the middle east women did enjoy a few freedoms, particularly in Arabia, where islam made its appearence, status of women was pretty elevated. They could freely engage in commerce and pertake in wars. Evidences exist in Quran and Hadis. Muhammad's first spouse, Khadija, does not find frequent mention in quran, hadis or in Islamic history. She conducted an independent business. She was a wealthy person, in possession of a strong personality and was a learned person, her personality was such, that, during her life time, muhammad could not marry another. After the demise of Khadije, muhammad married innumerable times, though, no dependable count has been established and opinions differ. Reportedly he had 22 marriages. Muhammad did not like a woman having personality or leadership traits. That is why, though quran and hadis and islamic history contains many refferences about muhammad's youngest wife Ayesha and his daughter Fatima, but Khadija is not refered that way. Pre-islam priveleges, respect and honour and rights, that, women were enjoying were progressively demolished by Muhammad. Women were hi-jacked from commerce and militery and interned them and quarantined them indoors. Sermonised: “do not display yourselves as [was] the display of the former times of ignorance”-(Al-Ahzab,33:34). Further, “bring down over themselves [part] of their outer garments”(Al Ahzab 33:59);”tell the believing women to reduce of their visionand not expose their adornment except that which [necessarily] appears thereof and to wrap [aportion of] their head covers over their chests (An-Nur,24:31). Women were relegated to “place of cultivation [ie. Sowing of seeds]”, (Al Baqarah. 2:223. Servicing your man is the all embracing purpose of existence. Whenever she is called to the bedside for satiation of lust, everything must be held up and satiation provided, (Hadis).Muhammad relegated women to the feet of her spouse.He has stated, that the feet of husband is the heaven for women. According to muhammad, a woman is unacceptable as a witness. He sermonises, that the evidence given by a woman is worth half that of a man,(Al-Baqara,2:282). Earlier, a woman could divorce her husband in case of provocation, this right was banished by Muhammad. Muhammad had introduced discrimination between men and women in the matter of rights of inheritance of property, sermonised: “ Allah instructs you concerning your children[ie. their portions of inheritance], for the male, what is equal to the share of two females”,(an-nisa, 4:11). He prohibite leadership by women, and the Imamate, instructed women not to visit graveyard. Instructed men not to meet a woman frontally, but from behind a partition,(Al-Ahzab,33:53). In Islam, the status of a slave woman is far more tragic compared to non-slave women. For 'free' women, four wives are permitted, but possession of slave women permits unlimited lusciousness, with unlimited individuals,”guard private parts except frrom their wives or those their right hand possess'(al-Mu'minun,23:6). Such women have been deprived all rights under islam. Thus, islam has at every step humiliated,disenfranchised,victimised, insulted, disempowered,and in fact have relegated women from human being to goods of commerce and sub-human specie. Supporting on the one hand the economic disparity, gender discrimination, and concurrently sprouting egalitarianism cannot be construed as emerging classless society.Islamic savants and their echoing camp followers of the muslim intelligentia may go on trumpeting “classlessness” of the creed, but the hollowness of the claims are supported by scripture itself and the mirage is destroyed. Conversely, the truth is, that Islam, barring a very few exceptions of professing social equity, supports and encourages the discrimination in economic devide, gender devide and the devide between the muslims and the non-muslims.Research into the existence of egalitarianism in islam will be counterproductive, because, in fact, islam has emphasised the division and discrimination.

It would be worth while, discussing the oft-professed approach to classless society of islam, to glance at the personal commitment in his personal life and practise, how muhammad, the originator and proslyteur of islam practised the concept. At the outset, it should be understood, that, whatever has so far been discussed, are based on Quranic regulation introduced in islam, for the muslims, and it has been found, that, Muhammad has been regarded as being above the laws and regulations for the mussalmans. Every muslim, at the time of marriage must pay the bride-price (mahr) and the marriage is invalid without this. Muhammad found exemption from this. There is controversy about whether, at all he followed this edict.At the time of wedding with khadija, they were both idolators. Subsequently, after muhammad attained Nabuyat, and the conversion of Khadija, whether the regulation was observed, is still unknown. After Khadija's demise, muhammad married twentyone more times, and question about the brideprice has still not been established, in fact it is almost certain, that the trifle was overlooked. Islam permits having upto four wives at a time. At the time when the relevant Ayat was revealed, Muhammad and his Sahabees(intimates),many of them had more than four. Muhammad instructed all to divorce all supernumeral wives. Although this unpalatable edict was harsh, but the Sahabees complied, muhammad, however did not comply. He sermonised, that Allah's directive was not for him. At the time of Muhammad's demise, there were nine widows.These facts ridicule the claim of islamic egalitarianism and emphasizes the inborn devisiveness and discrimination in Muhammad and islam. A satisfactory explanation eludes all rsearchers, as to why Allah was so partial to muhammad and disliked muhammad's close followers and camp followers. The only conclusion could be, that, muhammad enjoyed special privileges and was interested in enlarging on the same and he wanted to encourage discrimination and devisiveness. That was why, Allah was constrained to provide complimentary “wahi” to fulfil the desires of His Nabi. These two occasions are not exceptions, Allah had to proliferate many “wahi”s to be sent to muhammad, in fulfilment of muhammad's desire,whim and interest. This tendency prompted muhammad's youngest wife Ayesha, distraught at proliferating wahi, to react. This comment is well recorded. She said “Allah seems to be anxious to fulfil your desires”. There are innumerous instances of muhammad enjoying many privileges and advantages and personal interests compared to his companion, in Quran itself. Wealth looted in Jihad, were devided in a manner, wherby, one-fifth would be muhammads and the rest would be devided amongst the followers.Muhammad's claim was, that, this edict came from Allah. Quran edicts; “And know that anything you obtain of war booty -then indeed, for Allah is one fifth of it and for Messenger and for [his] near relatives and the orphans, the needy and the [stranded] traveller,(Al-Anfal, 8:41). The loot from the defeated in addition to money and valuables, contain other items, like human beings, which was also subject to same regulation.All loot is termed as “Ghanimat” and this barbaric act of robbery was claimed by muhammad to be as permissible under the regulation courriered by Allah. Muhammad, however, was not content with this one-fifth provision! His claim was to enjoy the entire Ghanimat and possess all of it. At the Badr campaign (first jihad of islam and muhammad) muhammad wanted to wolf the entire loot, including the men slaves, the wealth and goods in the caravan. He sermonised to his followers,'all wealth obtained in jihad is owned by Allah and His Rasool. In support of this claim, he reffered to a Wahi, which runs as follows: “They ask you[O Muhammad], about the bounties [of war]. Say, 'The [decision concerning] bounties is for Allah and the Messenger.' So fear Allah and amend that which is between you and obey Allah and His Messenger.”(Al Anfal,8:1).It is not known as to whether they 'feared' Allah, but a rebellion against the Wahi did occur. Immediately, thereafter, a new wahi with modified loot-sharing arrangement was necessarily revealed.

Natural justice and impartial adherence to norms are a precondition to an egalitarian society. Even class devided democratic systems of society are unanimous in advocating establishment of these criteria. But it is uncertain, if Muhammad had in his personal or public life had adhered to this concept. Non-muslims were certainly not on the radar of Muhammad's thought process, he was extremely uncharitable and harsh to them, without exception. But his own kith and kin amongst the non-muslims, his kindness and magnamity was unlimited. Amongst the captives of the Badr campaign, was present “Aash”, muhammad's son in law. Aash had not converted to islam, and was still an idolator. Aash was amongst those, who came to save Abu Sufian, a quoreish leader, as he and his caravan was ambushed by numerically stronger bandit brigade led by Muhammad, in jihad. Muhammad freed some captives, who could pay the ransom, but the poor amongst the captives, incapable of paying the ransom, were not freed. But “Aash”, incapable of paying ransom, was freed with honour. Example abundant of 'egalitarian' propensity of Muhammad. He did not deal with his followers, close and general, with equity and justice at all, either. Islam permits polygamy upto four wives and unlimited sex slaves. But, when Ali, muhammad's son in law expressed a desire to acquire a second spouse, Muhammad opposed violently, and did not dare allow himself the delight during muhammad's life time. After the demise of Muhammad, and Fatima, Ali married nine more. Muhammad's attitude to other women and his behaviour to them has already been discussed. It is apparent, that women have been discriminated against in a limitless way, their honour, rights and privileges have been mercilessly widely robbed, he could not show the least of compassion in this regard. His concern for his daughter, her honour and privileges, however, attracted unusual attention and care and alertness, and as a doting father he was ultra sympathetic and kind. Does one still consider Islam as a precursor of an egalitarian society? The Muslims are still led to believe so, and a section of non-muslim population appear to consider such a wrong concept. This assertion is false, chimeral and misleading. This wrong thesis, has brought no benefit to the muslims, conversely, has harmed the muslim society. Consideration from a free thought-free mind, and an unbiased study of life and times of Muhammad will vindicate the fact, that, an intrusive details study of Islam, will not bring out an iota of egalitarianism in Islam, or a semblance of egalitarian philosophy. In reality evidences abound of disequality,discrimination,devisiveness and biased behaviour.

Bengali Culture is endangered and threatened extinction by mullahcracy while West Bengal is indifferent and unconcerned

The nearer the approach to the general election in Bangladesh, desto louder are the fundamentalist cacophony. In stead of restraining this evil influence through constitutional meanss, the care taker government is paying court to this foul menace. Recently, one more step of the caretaker government emboldened the evildoers. The roundabout at the Dhaka airport building was being ornamented with a five Baul sculpture, which was removed at the insistence of a section of muslim fundamentalists and their fatwa, declaring the Baul sculpture as Un-islamic and insisting that, in a muslim state such un-islamic abomination will not be tolerated. The Bangladeshi haj aspirants' viewing such a sculpture will have deleterious effect on their pilgrimage. Simultaneously, their further demand was for the erection of a haj-minar at the round about.The care taker government of Bangladesh had bowed to the ugly fatwa and removed the sculpture from the site.

In march 2008 also, the care taker government had allowed itself to be trampled by the fundamentalist crowd. The then government had announced a 'women emancipation charter'. This charter provided for a historic statement of equal inheritance without gender bias, of property. This, also, expectedly, attracted the wrath of the muslim fundamentalists, and they dutifully took resort to fatwa declaring the chater as un-islamic and demanded evacuation. They went to the extent of threatening taking to the streets and begin a civil war from 14^th March, if the charter is not withdrawn forthwith.The care taker government did not tarry in conceding this demand too. On 11^th March, three interlocutors were despatched to the non-state activists and announced the repeal of the charter.

Elimination of the sculpture under commission, the muslim extremists are holding out further threats of demolishing ALL sculptures in Bangladesh. They hold out two other threats. Their tantrums are about (a) the “SHIKHA ANIRBAN”- [the flame unquenched] at the Dhaka cantonment, commemorating the freedom struggle; and (b) the “SHIKHA CHIRANTAN”- [the flame eternal] at the Suhrawardy Garden to commemorate independence; since they consider this as equivalent to fire-worship and needs be extinguished. Further, the Bengali New Year celebration at the “BATAMOOL” at Ramna, Dhaka, will also be disallowed, according to the follow up action of these fundamentalists. Celebrating the Bengali New Year is a cultural heritage and tradition of Bangladesh. The celebration of Bangla new year, the cultural follow through and at Ramna-Batamool was initiated by the cultural community 'Chhyanot' during the Pakistani rule as a movement in defiance of the then State aggression against Bengali tradition and culture, at the Ramna Batamool. That is the reason, why, this celebration and the site has found its identity with safeguarding the Bengali entity and rights and a secular manifestation. Muslim fundamentalists have tried their hand, on numerous failed occasions, to name the celebration as 'Hindu cultural manifestation' and prohibit the same. Now, they have erected a signboard, on an abandoned burial site at the batamool, calling the same as the last resting place of Hajrat Shah Sufi Akbar Shah, in an attempt to occupy the site and dislodge the new year celebration and relevant celebrations. They have not exhausted their fatwa wielding, yet. The Bait'ul Muquarrum Masjid abbuts on a road, which is named after Mani Singh, a communist leader, a well known leader of the freedom struggle. The latest tantrum is to insist that the vicinity of the mosque cannot be allowed to bear the name of a “MALAUN”. Their demand consists of replacing the name of Mani Singh by a former Khetib of the Bait'ul Muquarrum, the late Maulana Obeidul Huq. It may be recalled, that, the Maulana had expressed Fatwa about the freedom struggle callin it “un-islamic”.

There has been a tradition in Pakistan and Bangladesh, wherein, the armed forces do not enjoy civilian government and they like to perpetuate ruling the country by remaining in power. These countries find themselves under military rule, frequently. The present dispensation, at Bangladesh, is not in a hurry to disabuse this trend.The alacrity, with which the military care taker government are complying with the demands of the lunatic fundamentalist fringe, makes one wonder, as to whether the whole scheme is being engineered by themselves. And they are inspiring the movement.Many do believe, that, by strengthening the muslim fundamentalists' hand, the military are conspiring to influence the ensuing election. The creative elements of Bangladesh, writers,artists, literateurs, and intelligentia have emerged on the streets to protest removal of Baul sculpture, and they have named the round-about in front of the Dhaka airport as “Lalan Chattwar”.They have roundly condemned all fatwas and threats held out by the fundamentalist olema. They have demanded re-erection of the Baul sculptures at the round-about. They have also vowed to prevent the founding of a “Mazar-Sharif” at Ramna Batamool, at any sacrifice. They have characterised the foul misdeeds of the muslim fundamentalists, as a prelude to the conspiracy to establish so called 'Shariat state' and have called upon the countrymen to prevent perpetration of such a conspiracy.

With the trans-border fellow bengalis' culture, independence is threatened and is under concerted attack, we their sympathisers are complacently quiet and unconcerned and indifferent. This complacency of Indian bengalis, this inaction, indifference pinches my belief and also covers me with a feeling of shame.

Again, here, the antiques of a section of muslim intellectuals, heightens my shame and discomfort.They grudgingly exhibit disapproval at the deeds of the muslim fundamentalist crowd of Bangladesh, and heap admiration at the non-existent culture of tolerance in Islam and Muhammad. Their principal thrust is to defend the facade created on Islam and Muhammad, and faintly reproach the foul misdeeds of the votaries of fundamentalism. They seem to mean, that, the acts of these hooligans are not true Islam. Islam, they Goeblise, is a religion of Peace, Tolerance,forgiveness and what have you.

This charlatanry of feeble reproach to perpetrators of mayhem, violence and magnifying islamic virtues is nothing novel. This role of this section of muslim intellectuals, in self appointed role of protecting the image of Islam, is designed to create a space for assuming the leadership of the muslim masses, and, in that, they have failed, because this space is safely occupied by the fatwa toting, Arabic sprouting muslim fundamentalist olema, who still command grass root respect and honour, because of the illiteracy and backwardness of the community. The reason is not far to seek- the olema refer to Quran and Hadis and quote from them, they are living close to the populace, and they do not read newspaper, The fatwas, to these populace appear relevant to their rudimentary acquaintance with the scriptures.

The 'intellectuals' claim, that the fatwa about the sculptures and the road naming to commemorate Mani Singh, is not Islamic. There is no conflict in building a sculpture and naming roads after non-muslim names. These progressives even sermonised, that in watching idol worship, there is no conflict with islam and it is not forbidden. But, is that factual ? These intellectuals' assertion do not find support of Quran and Hadis.Quran has reiterated several times, that idol worshippers are never pardoned by Allah. Painting pictures also incur hard prohibition. There is a hadis, which reads thus: Muhammad once stated to his youngest wife Ayesha, inter-alia, “ are you not aware, that Farishta does not enter the room that contains pictures. The persons who build pictures will be punished at Quyamat.(Bokhari Sharif). If pictures invite such adverse attention, the severity of disapproval could be well preconceived on sculpture! There are several Ayats and hadis, and these are well known, it will be inadvertent to enumerate them now. Reference is however made to one Ayat, to indicate the severity, with which sculpture, idolatry and idol worshippers are said to be viewed by Allah: “Indeed, you and what you worship other than Allah are the firewood of Hell. You will be coming to [enter] it” (Al-Anbiya-21:98). Does one need further assert, that sculpting of human or any living form, watching idol approbation or commemorating a hindu name are capable of being accepted by islam? Comrade mani Singh, his name and fame is certainly enjoys large admiration from the well meaning population of the country, but to a hadis exponent and mass leadership aspirant, in possession of quranic knowledge, will not professionally admit it. Mani Singh is only a “Kafir”to such. Quran is replete and quite outspoken and assertive, as to how a Mussalman should react to a kafir- who is required to earn only hate, unreliability, disrespect and enmity. There are numerous such Ayats, out of which two are reproduced herein: “ O you who have believed, do not take any disbelievers as allies instead of believers (An Nisa. 4:144). “ O you who have believed, do not take as intimates those other than yourselves[ i.e. Believers], for they will not spare you [any] ruin.(Ali Imran. 3:118). A Mussalman is considered to have irrefutable belief in the truth and sanctity in every iota of Quran, how can he be considered to be able to tolerate a kafir?

Those misguided persons, who tend to outperform the muslim fundamentalists in securing leadership in unlettered, innocent of modern education muslim masses are chasing a chimera.Main armoury of the muslim fundamentalists are Quran and Hadis. This struggle against the entrenched muslim fundamentalists is a long and arduous one.This cannot be won by parroting an imaginery version of Islam to educate the unlettered. The flag needs be one of secularism, humanism, progress, education-modern and scientific and development. Religious fundamentalism can be conquered, not by compromising with religion, but by laying bear the real face of “Religion”.

Need exists for the main stream modern education NOT Retrogressive Madrasa education

Need exists for the main stream modern education

NOT

Retrogressive Madrasa education

Mohammedan college of law, in other words, the Calcutta Alia Madrasa was established in 1780 AD. Then the lingua franca were Arbi and Farsi. This establishment of the madrasa was expected to fill the need for educated Indians who could assist the East India Company in ruling the new and expanding territory and act as interface with Delhi. In 1837, the East India Company changed the language policy and decided on English as the preffered language, and progressively enforced compulsory learning of english for employment in government establishments. This expired the need for madrasa education and the system reoriented itself into manufacturing Mullahs only.

None amongst the civil muslim society, then, opined that, the muslims need english and modern education, and that the need for madrasa or religious instruction is unnecessery. Raja Rammohan Roy unerringly insisted on similar system of education. In 1823, when the East Indian Company attempted initiation of a second sanskrit college, he had strongly objected to the move, and wrote to the governor in strong protest. In his letter, he demanded, that, Indians do not need religious oriented education, the need was for education in science and modern thoughts and english.One wonders in admiration and simultaneously feels deep shame,that, the kind of progressive thought that Raja exhibited 185 years ago, none amongst the muslim society could think of it even now. A few did muster gumption to murmur that modern education is good, but none had the audacity to say that, madrasa education is retrogressive. Consequently, the hindu civil society have diversified the religious oriented instruction, the 'Tol' system from the main stream education, the retrogressive madrasa education continues to oppress the muslim society, under the juggernaut.

Private madrasas number about 5000. Government recognised madrasa and high madrasa and senior madrasas and the private(kharija) madrasa, have some difference in syllabi, but both systems are basically religious oriented. Both systems are retrogressive and act as a major hindrance to the progress and advancement of the community. Shame abounds, to think, that, the governments are appeasing and encouraging this dangerous system. In this connection, the role of the left front government is more destructive than the congress. In 1947, the high and senior madrasas numbered 186. During the 30 years of congress regime, in 1976-77 the number rose to 238. Left front government approved five fold increase. Now, there are 506 of them.

The state is expected to encourage and bring awareness of people to embrace modern education in stead of religious orientation and to bring this within easy reach of the masses. Post independence, the governments have failed and neglected this sacred duty and have patronised lavishly the religious form of instruction, solely to paliate and appease the mullacracy, in the unreal belief, that, the muslim masses are under the thumb of the clergy and the demographic votebank artists, posing as thought leaders have succumbed, to the detriment of the whole society- particularly the muslims. Consequently, the national integrity has suffered, national policy of secularism has been enfeebled and has weakened the nation- while the greatest burden of suffering is inflicted on muslims, who are being dragged into the mire of dogmatism, retrogression, decay in life style in totality and perpetually.

The principal ruling pparty, namely the CPM contains a major rift amongst their opinion makers, in the matter of patronising the madrasa education. Those to whom the pristine communist idea and ideals were relevant, raised protest in party fora in consequence of which, the party and the government decided not to encourage new madrasas and simultaneously to modernise the madrasa education system.This resulted in a stay for about a decade, in not approving new madrasas and though slow, but effective steps were taken towards incorporation of modern education. A section of renegades containing opportunists and vote bank artists compelled the government to resile. The government submitted to the mullahcracy and deferred the modernisation of the syllabi and reinstalled the harmful system of establishment of new madrasas in muslim populated areas.2008-09 budget found substantial enhancement in the grant for madrasa education. Previous years approval of 209 crore rupees was enhanced to Rs. 319 crores, a record increase of 54.11%. Stay in modernisation of the system and rise in the number of old style madrasas express a desire of relegating the muslim masses to greater retrogression. Even this did not meet a single murmur of protest from the community. It is difficult to explain the extent of damage caused by the madrasa system, how it pushes the masses to further darkness, deprivation and despair. A look at the syllabi could throw some illumination on the irrelevance of the education 1400 years after the initiation.

Madrasas recognised and aided by the government are minly of two types :- (1) High Madrasa, (2) Senior madrasa. The High madrasa have three levels-- the junior high madrasa; high madrasa; and higher secondery. Senior madrasa have four levels-- Alim; Fazil; Kamil; MM. The high madrasa syllabi have received some modernisation courtsey the left front, though not to desirable extent. Thus the madrasa education board syllabi for madrasas are at disadvantage compared to the Schhol final syllabus products. In senior madrasas, the students study together from standard one to the Alim(10 th class) stage. Left front government have conceeded the Alim as equivalent to school final. This has appeased the mullahs but has irreparably damaged the community. Syllabus for Alim is very much inferior compared to the school final syllabus. The Alim syllabus is as follows:-Total marks 900, out of which modern education is for 550 marks and Islamic and Arabic education is for 350 marks. Bengali-100; English-100;Mathematics-100; Physical sciences-50; life sciences-50; History-100; Geography-50; along with Islamic education as Arabic-100; Hadis-100; Tafseer-100 and Wofeka-50. Can we expect comparative equivalence between the products of these two syllabi ?

Fazil has been deemed equivalent to Higher Secondery. The mullahcracy has raised demands for such a recognition. The Syllabus is as follows:- Arabic-200; English-200; Islamic studies (Hadis and Tafseer)-200; a combination-Arts/Science/Commerce etc-200; an additional-200. Does this impart equivalence to higher secondery?

Kamil: Madrasa education board syllabus calls this syllabus as equivalent to B.A. The syllabus is as follows:-

Part one: English—50, Bengali/Urdu-50, Environment-50 ( these three are analoguous to Calcutta University); Islamic studies-100, Arabic literature-100(analoguous to CU) and one elective subject-100, to be selected from (a)general history, (b) Islamic history, (c) civics, (d) computer science, (e) bengali, (f) urdu. Total for part one-450.

Kamil Part 2: (1) Islamic studies-200,(2) Arabic literature-200, (3) an elective-any one of six above-200.Total marks-600.

Kamil Part 3: 

(1) Islamic studies-100, 

(2) Arabic literature-100,

(3) an elective as above. Total-300.

Kamil-general the total marks(parts 1,2 and 3)--1350

Kamil equivalent to BA (hons)- Part one: 

(1) English-50, 

(2) Bengali/Urdu-50, 

(3) Environment-50,

(4) Elective (Arabic literature/Islamic studies)-100, 

(5) Elective-similar to kamil general- any of the six-100. Total-350

Part Two(hons)- 

(1) Islamic Studies or literature- four papers- 400; 

(2) Elective-Islamic studies/Arabic literature-200; 

(3) Elective subject-any one of six akin to part one-200. Total-800

Part Three(hons)- Islamic studies (4 papers)- 4x100—400

Kamil hons total ( parts 1,2 and 3)--350+800+400--1550

Mumtazul Muhaddeshin(MM)- Two years course-claimed to be equivalent to MA.

Part one: Hadis orArabic literature or Tarikh-e-Islam( Islamic History)- Five papers-5x100=500

Part two: Similar to part one, any one of the three- 5x100=500.

Muslim populated localities have suffered due to government indifference and discrimination, and have fewer schools and colleges; and complimented by hundreds of high-madras and senior madrasas and few thousands of KHARIJA madrasas have relegated the education system to an abyss. The main reason of the dereliction of the muslim community is the madrasa education system and the favour the system finds amongst the community- inspired by the mullahcracy- who have now grown into a new class of opinion makers, aided and abetted by the politicians. Voices must needs be raised in derating madrasa system and in enlisting modern higher education.