kepler37b Posted April 2 Posted April 2 christian groups have been silent on this. This amendment has their silent approval.
Muloghonto Posted April 2 Posted April 2 On 3/29/2025 at 8:28 PM, Mariyam said: Of course! How dare Muslims have a statutory body for themselves? I honestly dont understand how a smart woman like you, who is well educated in law no less, cannot see the demerits of having a religious based property transfer system in a nation, much less in a nation where said religious group is a small MINORITY and therefore it makes even less sense to have land acquisition in a nation allowed on basis of RELIGIOUS criteria.. Like....why would anyone non muslim like the concept of Waqf and not see it as predatory long term religious land acquisition via marrying non muslims ??? we dont care what xyz religion says - heck i am GLAD hindu doesnt have a waqf because the whole idea of acquiring land based off of xyz religious principle is a NONSENSE idea of trying to get land in the first place and should be considered exercising predatory advantage in land aqusitions.... raki05 1
AuxiliA Posted April 2 Posted April 2 Funny moment. Akaless walked right into it. rkt.india, raki05 and rangeelaraja 3
rangeelaraja Posted April 2 Author Posted April 2 5 minutes ago, AuxiliA said: Funny moment. Akaless walked right into it. He is still very polite and jovial. Yogi would have ripped Akhilesh into shreds in his reply. raki05 1
coffee_rules Posted April 2 Posted April 2 Voting underway in LS. Tomorrow in RS. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/parliament-budget-session-live-updates-waqf-amendment-bill-lok-sabha-rajya-sabha-bjp-nda-congress/liveblog/119890845.cms They have made the amendment effective from April 25. So, earlier ones which were not disputed cannot be re-opened. This is a fail for Hindus. But, this also is a request of Nitish/Naidu/Paswan, so BJP has to cow down. At least some of the Sachar comittee recos have been included. Non-Hindus and Muslim Women in the WaQF council is a big one. It will be resisted a lot by Sunni Men!! randomGuy 1
Mariyam Posted April 2 Posted April 2 2 hours ago, Muloghonto said: I honestly dont understand how a smart woman like you, who is well educated in law no less, cannot see the demerits of having a religious based property transfer system in a nation, much less in a nation where said religious group is a small MINORITY and therefore it makes even less sense to have land acquisition in a nation allowed on basis of RELIGIOUS criteria.. Like....why would anyone non muslim like the concept of Waqf and not see it as predatory long term religious land acquisition via marrying non muslims ??? we dont care what xyz religion says - heck i am GLAD hindu doesnt have a waqf because the whole idea of acquiring land based off of xyz religious principle is a NONSENSE idea of trying to get land in the first place and should be considered exercising predatory advantage in land aqusitions.... Your critique is unfounded. I have actually read the ACT and am familiar with its various amendments. Land acquisition via marrying non Muslims? That has nothing to do with the Waqf. Not sure what you are trying to get at here. It is quite sad that the Waqf Act has come to be seen as a land grabbing tool, where as it was originally intended to be a mechanism to carry out upkeep of Islamic property that is essentially economically unviable. Please go through my comments on the topic are on this very thread: On 11/24/2024 at 1:23 PM, Mariyam said: Have any of you even read the Waqf Act of 1995 before launching into a diatribe against all things Muslim? Everything is not a big Muslim conspiracy against India. Surprising as it may sound. The main point of contention is Section 40 of the Act i.e the near unchallenged powers of the Waqf tribunal. That should be abolished, and there is merit to that argument. But why abolish the Act? Most of the immovable properties with the Waqf boards across the states are graveyards. Most of these have been encroached upon by various entities. Both public and private. In my ( absolutely unbiased, or I try to be here) opinion, it makes sense to digitize Waqf records, bring Waqf property under the ambit of tax laws and remove the Waqf tribunal and let the litigants slog it out in regular courts. That would be a win win for everyone. Guess what, this (the part in bold) is exactly what has happened. https://www.business-standard.com/india-news/waqf-bill-2025-section-40-controversy-kalyan-banerjee-125040200969_1.html On 11/26/2024 at 8:25 AM, Mariyam said: Thank you for an on the topic and logical response. There are two aspects here which can and should be separated: 1) Is there a need for a Waqf? Act of 1954/55 2) Does the Act need over reaching powers? Amendment of 1995 The answer to the first question is yes. As a part of freedom of religion, you can make an arguement that a religious body determine how its assets are run. The ASI will take care arguement doesn't hold true always. There are many properties in India which do not fall under the ambit of the ASI protected structures but still are properties of religious/historic significance. The answer to the second question is that the Waqf tribunal be defanged and claims fought out in regular courts. And the onus should be on the claimant if he says xyz is a Waqf land to show land records at least back to a certain period to make the claim. Else just quash the case as frivolous and fine him for wasting the time of the respectable court. Again, pretty much on lines with the current amendment.
Teengunalagaan Posted April 2 Posted April 2 The Waqf (Amendment) Bill 2025 has been passed in the Lok Sabha.#WaqfAmendmentBill pic.twitter.com/0bNZKowM0v — ANI (@ANI) April 2, 2025 Our MPs are working at 2 AM in the night, ye kaha aa gaye hum raki05, Pratik77, rangeelaraja and 2 others 1 1 3
rangeelaraja Posted April 2 Author Posted April 2 (edited) Hi @Mariyam : Since you've reviewed the Waqf Act, may I respectfully ask you to address 2 basic but critical questions around fairness and equality that remain unanswered : Q1. In a secular country like India, is it fair to have a two-tier system for managing religious endowments? Why are Islamic waqf properties managed under state-backed Waqf Boards, while Hindu, Christian, and Sikh endowments rely on private trusts? No similar state-supported boards or exclusive legislation exist for other religions. The Waqf Board enjoys special legal protections, dedicated legislation (Waqf Act), and government oversight. What happens if every religious group demands its own government-managed board and law? Would that still align with the principle of secularism ? Q2. Why is India the only secular country where ONLY ONE minority religion has a state-sponsored waqf system? In other secular countries like the UK, US, Canada, and South Africa, Muslims are a sizable minority too—but: Waqf is community-managed, not state-administered. All religious charities operate under common trust or charity laws, ensuring equal treatment. Why can’t India follow the model of UK, South Africa, US, Canada ? The current waqf structure India : Creates legal / religious asymmetry Undermines secularism by granting state privileges to one religious group. Edited April 2 by rangeelaraja Sgattick10 1
mishra Posted April 2 Posted April 2 Waqf Board is supposedly Government created Institution to manage donated Islamic properties for public welfare in a democracy and not just islamic people. Also, Government has all right to employ people by meritocracy and caste based reservation. Some may think its too far fetched but every important Board in India follows caste based reservation so ehy rules are being broken for waqf Board or muslim personal law Board
Muloghonto Posted April 2 Posted April 2 2 hours ago, Mariyam said: Your critique is unfounded. I have actually read the ACT and am familiar with its various amendments. Land acquisition via marrying non Muslims? That has nothing to do with the Waqf. Not sure what you are trying to get at here. It is quite sad that the Waqf Act has come to be seen as a land grabbing tool, where as it was originally intended to be a mechanism to carry out upkeep of Islamic property that is essentially economically unviable. Maam, if my daughter marries a Muslim dude and inherits part of my property, then she pre-deceases her hubby, he can will her family inheritance to waqf if he wishes ( assuming I predeceased my daughter, so she inherited from me). This means, a Muslim land acquisition method remains for acquiring non muslim land under a muslim trust. Why would any non muslim like this in effect is my question . If property is economically enviable, it ceases to function in it's capacity till it is - sell it, repurpise it whatever. Same fate as Hindu property. Why is that not just ??
coffee_rules Posted April 3 Posted April 3 4 hours ago, Mariyam said: Your critique is unfounded. I have actually read the ACT and am familiar with its various amendments. Land acquisition via marrying non Muslims? That has nothing to do with the Waqf. Not sure what you are trying to get at here. It is quite sad that the Waqf Act has come to be seen as a land grabbing tool, where as it was originally intended to be a mechanism to carry out upkeep of Islamic property that is essentially economically unviable. Please go through my comments on the topic are on this very thread: Guess what, this (the part in bold) is exactly what has happened. https://www.business-standard.com/india-news/waqf-bill-2025-section-40-controversy-kalyan-banerjee-125040200969_1.html Again, pretty much on lines with the current amendment. Continuing from the previous discussion, what are your views on the amendments? I am kind of disappointed about the validity of amendments only from here on. Past mistakes cannot be revisited.
coffee_rules Posted April 3 Posted April 3 1 hour ago, Muloghonto said: Maam, if my daughter marries a Muslim dude and inherits part of my property, then she pre-deceases her hubby, he can will her family inheritance to waqf if he wishes ( assuming I predeceased my daughter, so she inherited from me). This means, a Muslim land acquisition method remains for acquiring non muslim land under a muslim trust. Why would any non muslim like this in effect is my question . If property is economically enviable, it ceases to function in it's capacity till it is - sell it, repurpise it whatever. Same fate as Hindu property. Why is that not just ?? Blame Congress and Nehru for appeasing muslims with Personal laws in the garb of freedom of religion Muloghonto and raki05 2
coffee_rules Posted April 3 Posted April 3 3 hours ago, rangeelaraja said: Since you've reviewed the Waqf Act, may I respectfully ask you to address 2 basic but critical questions around fairness and equality that remain unanswered : Q1. In a secular country like India, is it fair to have a two-tier system for managing religious endowments? Why are Islamic waqf properties managed under state-backed Waqf Boards, while Hindu, Christian, and Sikh endowments rely on private trusts? No similar state-supported boards or exclusive legislation exist for other religions. The Waqf Board enjoys special legal protections, dedicated legislation (Waqf Act), and government oversight. What happens if every religious group demands its own government-managed board and law? Would that still align with the principle of secularism ? Q2. Why is India the only secular country where ONLY ONE minority religion has a state-sponsored waqf system? In other secular countries like the UK, US, Canada, and South Africa, Muslims are a sizable minority too—but: Waqf is community-managed, not state-administered. All religious charities operate under common trust or charity laws, ensuring equal treatment. Why can’t India follow the model of UK, South Africa, US, Canada ? The current waqf structure India : Creates legal / religious asymmetry Undermines secularism by granting state privileges to one religious group. Blame Congress and Nehru for appeasing muslims with Personal laws in the garb of freedom of religion We are stuck wut this. raki05 1
rangeelaraja Posted April 3 Author Posted April 3 38 minutes ago, coffee_rules said: Blame Congress and Nehru for appeasing muslims with Personal laws in the garb of freedom of religion We are stuck wut this. You know, if we reflect honestly, the root of this issue isn’t just our dishonest politicians or Muslims—it's entirely the lack of unity among the majority Hindu electorate. Especially among segments that are often divided along caste or regional lines, which makes it easier for political parties to exploit these divisions for vote-bank politics. If 75–80% of Hindu voters voted as a cohesive block, it would likely send a strong message to parties like the Congress and shitshow fraud parties like RJD or SP, that appeasement politics and selective policy frameworks—which often deepen communal divisions—are no longer effective. This could prompt a shift toward more balanced and inclusive governance. The moot question is -- why hasn’t an organization like the RSS, known for its discipline and organizational strength, been able to build such lasting Hindu unity in a decisive way? Had this votebank consolidation occurred earlier, discriminatory systems like the state-backed Waqf Board, which go against the spirit of secular equality, might have been crushed a long time ago. raki05 1
randomGuy Posted April 3 Posted April 3 (edited) 20 minutes ago, rangeelaraja said: The moot question is -- why hasn’t an organization like the RSS, known for its discipline and organizational strength, been able to build such lasting Hindu unity in a decisive way? make people like pushpendra kulshrestha the sarsanghchalak. He has excellent thoughts on caste and heaps of praise for so called lower castes. RSS should learn from people like Swami dayanand saraswati and his institutions like arya samaj. If you want to get 70-80% dalit support, then this is the way. Praising of so-called lower castes and acknowledging injustices against them should be the focal point of speeches. This will bring hindu unity. Modi is more intelligent than RSS people and people like sanjay dixit. Edited April 3 by randomGuy raki05 1
coffee_rules Posted April 3 Posted April 3 1 hour ago, EnterTheVoid said: Great decision. Long overdue. Still has to go through RS vote. Tnen all street protests, riots, chaati peeth RR.. And then Modi says .. Repeal the act becaise of Bihar elections!!! EnterTheVoid, randomGuy and raki05 3
kepler37b Posted April 3 Posted April 3 16 minutes ago, coffee_rules said: Still has to go through RS vote. Tnen all street protests, riots, chaati peeth RR.. And then Modi says .. Repeal the act becaise of Bihar elections!!! Most probably not. Even xtian groups were hoping for this act. Well done Chacha Modi. If they do street protests, they will become the laughing stock. raki05 1
kepler37b Posted April 3 Posted April 3 (edited) 2 hours ago, rangeelaraja said: You know, if we reflect honestly, the root of this issue isn’t just our dishonest politicians or Muslims—it's entirely the lack of unity among the majority Hindu electorate. Especially among segments that are often divided along caste or regional lines, which makes it easier for political parties to exploit these divisions for vote-bank politics. If 75–80% of Hindu voters voted as a cohesive block, it would likely send a strong message to parties like the Congress and shitshow fraud parties like RJD or SP, that appeasement politics and selective policy frameworks—which often deepen communal divisions—are no longer effective. This could prompt a shift toward more balanced and inclusive governance. The moot question is -- why hasn’t an organization like the RSS, known for its discipline and organizational strength, been able to build such lasting Hindu unity in a decisive way? Had this votebank consolidation occurred earlier, discriminatory systems like the state-backed Waqf Board, which go against the spirit of secular equality, might have been crushed a long time ago. Most hindus are driven by economic benefits/regionalism/casteism. The barbarism of abrahamics makes them form temporary alliances. Cannot blame RSS. Edited April 3 by kepler37b
Recommended Posts