Conflict over attempted animal sacrifice at dargah in Madurai has sparked communal tensions in Thiruparankundram hills. Now, BJP & pro-Hindutva groups are seeking dargah’s removal.
All India Sufi Sajjadanashin Council, an association of over 800 dargahs, welcomes Centre’s decision. It also demands provisions to bring transparency in functioning of waqf boards.
In her book ‘In Search of the Divine,’ Rana Safvi writes about how Sufism developed a distinct character in India, and harmoniously embraced Bhakti traditions.
The ISA should champion a Global Solar Asset Registry for standardised project information, and establish a Solar Credit Guarantee mechanism to mitigate political and currency risks.
Mini deal will likely see no cut in 10% baseline tariff on Indian exports announced by Trump on 2 April, it is learnt, but additional 26% tariffs are set to be reduced.
BJP has no dynastic succession, at least not at the top. You can trace this back to Vajpayee-Advani era. This act of spotting, empowering younger talent is even more striking with the choice of BJP presidents.
The Sikandar Badushah Dargah must be removed from the hill. The Muslims have no claim over the hill. The hill belongs to Hindus and Jains. It has been that way for over millennia. The Muslims cannot just forcibly construct a Dargah on the hill and then lay claim on the hill itself.
Historians like Prof. A Ramasamy deliberately beat around the bush. His attempt at indicating that Hindus have no rights over the hill and that it exclusively belonged to the Jains is reprehensible to say the least. He must be an adherent of the Dravidian ideology of Periyar. His ideology quite clearly trumps his commitment to history.
Nevertheless, we Hindus will accept it if the hill is given to the Jains. We are ready to cede control dn ownership of the hills to the Jains. But the Muslims must shift the Dargah out of the hills. They do not have any place at all in these sacred hills.
The article mentions several politicians by name but not the MP who was nearly at the centre of this incident. How about the reported attempt by the other side to hoist their flag on the “sthalaviruksham’ – did that contribute to sentiments of the Hindus being offended?
Such glaring omissions on a news article that leads with calling TamilNadu “Periyar’s land” makes it not interested in presenting a full and balanced view of the situation.
The Sikandar Badushah Dargah must be removed from the hill. The Muslims have no claim over the hill. The hill belongs to Hindus and Jains. It has been that way for over millennia. The Muslims cannot just forcibly construct a Dargah on the hill and then lay claim on the hill itself.
Historians like Prof. A Ramasamy deliberately beat around the bush. His attempt at indicating that Hindus have no rights over the hill and that it exclusively belonged to the Jains is reprehensible to say the least. He must be an adherent of the Dravidian ideology of Periyar. His ideology quite clearly trumps his commitment to history.
Nevertheless, we Hindus will accept it if the hill is given to the Jains. We are ready to cede control dn ownership of the hills to the Jains. But the Muslims must shift the Dargah out of the hills. They do not have any place at all in these sacred hills.
The article mentions several politicians by name but not the MP who was nearly at the centre of this incident. How about the reported attempt by the other side to hoist their flag on the “sthalaviruksham’ – did that contribute to sentiments of the Hindus being offended?
Such glaring omissions on a news article that leads with calling TamilNadu “Periyar’s land” makes it not interested in presenting a full and balanced view of the situation.