Politics around renaming Aurangzeb road

[Tiger80]

Plenty name their children Shajahan .

never heard shah jahan as muslim name , but india is big so I take your words

[asterix]

Still not sure if BJP wanted to communalise why Khalifa Kejri jumped the guns and welcomed the move? After all these days non-Muslim Sickulars behave more Muslims than actual Pakis...

[gs]

Still not sure if BJP wanted to communalise why Khalifa Kejri jumped the guns and welcomed the move? After all these days non-Muslim Sickulars behave more Muslims than actual Pakis...

How dare you question the khalifa kejri's (peace be upon him) intentions?!? :--D

[zen]

The muslims who are protesting against it are not doing it because they think aurangeb was good and just but because they are feeling the heat cornered they feel that country's muslim heritage is being erased replaced by Hindu., Yes i know the name is being replace by another muslim kalam but how long before some other muslim named road is replaced by hindu name. Kalam would be more happy if there was harmony between hindus and muslims rather than them fighting over this road using his name.

That's probably unnecessarily complicating matters or overthinking or trying to be over-safe .... For me, the religion of a person is secondary to the atrocities he/she committed .... I don't think Christians (in general) would put forward such argument or thinking wrt Hitler, who would be condemned equally by everyone If there was no harmony b/w Hindus and Muslims, Ind would have been in a lot worse position by now :winky:

[Number]

Drawing equivalence between Ashoka and Aurangzeb = Drawing equivalence between US (for Hiroshima/Nagasaki) and Hitler.

[zen]

A reminder ---> Fatawa-e-Alamgiri: "In order to compile Fatawa-e-Alamgiri, Aurangzeb gathered 500 experts in Islamic jurisprudence (Faqīh), 300 from the South Asia, 100 from Iraq and 100 from the Hejaz (Saudi Arabia)." The "experts" came up with this:

* Two or more Muslims, or persons subject to Muslims, who enter a non-Muslim controlled territory for the purpose of pillage, and thus seize some property of the inhabitants there, and bring it back into the Muslim territory, that property would be legally theirs * A Muslim man's right to have sex with a captive slave girl he owns or a slave girl owned by another Muslim (with master's consent) without marrying her * A Muslim master's right to acknowledge or decline recognition children born to slave girls - a recognition that affected whether the slave's children would have any inheritance, the inability of infidels (non-Muslims) to inherit * No inheritance rights for slaves * The testimony of all slaves was inadmissible in a court of law * Slaves require permission of the master before they can marry Also rules against Muslim women * The guardian of a Muslim girl may arrange and force her to marry against her will * A woman cannot claim that a particular Muslim man is the father of her child, such claims would be invalid unless the man acknowledges it * A Muslim man with four wives must treat all of them justly, equally and each must come to his bed when he so demands

Wiki PS "The Aurangzeb-sponsored document was based on Hanafi Sunni sharia. Shia Muslims were in conflict with Sunni Muslims of South Asia, as were other minority sects of Islam, and they questioned the applicability of Fatawa-i Alamgiri" I guess, even today many of the "experts" revere Aurangzeb :P

[The Outsider]

3 points 1) Muslims don't even name Shah jahan, humayon , jahangir as their children name, they don't even name Dara shikoh so muslims not naming their children Aurangzeb does not mean they don't consider him good king

Names like Aurangzeb, Taimur are purposely avoided in Indian Muslim households like Kunti and Kekayi are avoided in Hindu households. Humayun is used often and so are Salim and Khurram, which were the names of Jahangir and Shah Jahan.

2) At the time of Britishers there two major political forces Congress and muslim league. Muslim league created Pakistan and they do like Aurangzeb. Britishers had to maintain balance between naming roads on Hindu/ sikh kings and Muslim kings O/W one side blame Britishers of being pro to other. Now assuming Muslim league supporters are not in India and muslims in India are secular so they should not support Aurangzeb

Muslim League was a non entity at that time. Muslim League really grew into prominence as a force during the late 1930s by which time Luytens had already been established. And again, I don't see any evidence of Aurangzeb being glorified in India.

3)If a road is being named after general dyer I am assuming you don't have problem with it as General Dyer to justified his actions according to orders given to him

I would still oppose it, but will at least understand the rationale behind it. Because if some road is named after Dyer by the British it would be to glorify him. Similarly, if the proposal was to change the name of Aurangabad I would oppose it but understand it because it was named so by the Mughals to glorify Aurangzeb. In this case, the road was named after Aurangzeb by the British not to glorify him but as a historical fact and thus the reason to change it is irrational to begin with.

[seedhi]

Names like Aurangzeb, Taimur are purposely avoided in Indian Muslim households like Kunti and Kekayi are avoided in Hindu households. Humayun is used often and so are Salim and Khurram, which were the names of Jahangir and Shah Jahan. Muslim League was a non entity at that time. Muslim League really grew into prominence as a force during the late 1930s by which time Luytens had already been established. And again, I don't see any evidence of Aurangzeb being glorified in India. I would still oppose it, but will at least understand the rationale behind it. Because if some road is named after Dyer by the British it would be to glorify him. Similarly, if the proposal was to change the name of Aurangabad I would oppose it but understand it because it was named so by the Mughals to glorify Aurangzeb. In this case, the road was named after Aurangzeb by the British not to glorify him but as a historical fact and thus the reason to change it is irrational to begin with.

Does the opinion of the people of Delhi count for anything in your grand scheme? They are as a majority represented by the AAP's CM Kejriwal (who supported renaming) and the BJP which combined together have 70/70 MLAs and 7/7 MPs in Delhi. Just because our erstwhile colonial masters the British named a road after a despot does not mean that the people of Delhi are bound by that decision for all times to come. Especially if an overwhelming majority supports the name change. Earlier in this thread, I have given several examples of places and symbols associated with racists in the USA being removed/replaced from the public domain on popular demand. Democratic countries bow to the will of their people.

[The Outsider]

Does the opinion of the people of Delhi count for anything in your grand scheme? They are as a majority represented by the AAP's CM Kejriwal (who supported renaming) and the BJP which combined together have 70/70 MLAs and 7/7 MPs in Delhi. Just because our erstwhile colonial masters the British named a road after a despot does not mean that the people of Delhi are bound by that decision for all times to come. Especially if an overwhelming majority supports the name change. Earlier in this thread, I have given several examples of places and symbols associated with racists in the USA being removed/replaced from the public domain on popular demand. Democratic countries bow to the will of their people.

My grand scheme? I don't have any schemes, forget about their grandeur. The voice of the majority is important as long as it is rational. If the majority wants to rename Aurangabad because it feels uncomfortable with a name bestowed on behalf of self glorification, I'll disagree but feel that is well within the realm of democracy. If the majority feels they need to rename Aurangzeb road even though the underlying reason for it is not glorification but historical, then we have stepped over the line between a democracy and majoritarianism. Such moves should be opposed stridently because they have been shown to set dangerous precedents historically.

[seedhi]

My grand scheme? I don't have any schemes, forget about their grandeur. The voice of the majority is important as long as it is rational. If the majority wants to rename Aurangabad because it feels uncomfortable with a name bestowed on behalf of self glorification, I'll disagree but feel that is well within the realm of democracy. If the majority feels they need to rename Aurangzeb road even though the underlying reason for it is not glorification but historical, then we have stepped over the line between a democracy and majoritarianism. Such moves should be opposed stridently because they have been shown to set dangerous precedents historically.

This "criterion" for renaming doesn't make any sense to me. How does it matter what the British motivations were (which cannot be verified with certainty anyway) for naming the road after Aurangzeb? For those who want the name Aurangzeb not adorning any major public landmarks it is reprehensible anyway. Just like Aurangabad as a name for a city would be an anathema for them. Renaming Aurangzeb Road is as rational or irrational as renaming Aurangabad. It is not being proposed that Aurangzeb be forgotten or removed from the history books. Only that landmarks should not be named after a cruel despot with almost no redeeming qualities. Renaming of landmarks happens all the time. The Willingdon crescent (named after a Viceroy of India) was renamed to bear Mother Teresa's name. This is equally rational/irrational as renaming Aurangzeb Road. The confederate flag is part of American history, as are the various personalities who espoused racist causes. Yet, on popular demand, many of these symbols and associated landmarks of the racist past (which is integral to American history) are being removed or renamed.

[Tiger80]

Names like Aurangzeb, Taimur are purposely avoided in Indian Muslim households like Kunti and Kekayi are avoided in Hindu households. Humayun is used often and so are Salim and Khurram, which were the names of Jahangir and Shah Jahan.

Abul Muzaffar Muhi-ud-Din Muhammad Aurangzeb , You are taking real name of Jahangir and shah jahan but for Aurangzeb you are taking his title.Thereal name of Aurangzeb whatever you take is extremely popular among muslims. As I said many mughal names and titles are not so popular among indian muslims and may be rarely found for whatever reason

Muslim League was a non entity at that time. Muslim League really grew into prominence as a force during the late 1930s by which time Luytens had already been established. And again, I don't see any evidence of Aurangzeb being glorified in India.

Muslim communal and separatist politics was always their , that's why britishers gave separate electorates on the basis of religion to muslims in 1909.The environment in pre partition india was communaly charged so Britishera had to mainatin balance

[Sarkar]

Someone rename Hyderabad International Airport from "Rajiv Gandhi International Airport " to something else What the heck did Rajiv Gandhi do for Hyderabad? :mad: Even cricket Stadium is Rajiv Gandhi International Stadium :banghead: . In fact our tax payer money was used by Govt to pay 'Visakha Industries' - the ones that built it to rename it from 'Visakha International Cricket Stadium' to the Rajiv Gandhi one.

Exactly what has Rajiv and his congress leaders did for AP AND TELANGANA.

[zen]

ISIS (a movement about suppressing women and Kafirs, and ruling by the sword) is probably reminding us what living under Aurangzeb might have been like:

Kidnapped, beaten, sold, and raped: The Islamic State group is running an international market in Iraq where Christian and Yazidi women are sold as sexual slaves, a teenager who escaped told AFP on Tuesday. "They tortured us, tried to forcefully convert us," she said. "If we refused, we were beaten, chained outdoors in the sun, forced to drink water with dead mice in it. Sometimes they threatened to torture us with electricity. "These men are not human. They only think of death, killing. They take drugs constantly. They seek vengeance against everyone. They say that one day Islamic State will rule over the whole world." The best-looking girls were reserved for the bosses or wealthy clients from Gulf nations. LINK

ISIS fatwas created by its "experts"

Convinced that she did not speak Arabic, Janin's two owners spoke freely in front of her, and one night she heard a conversation revealing the extent to which the slave trade is run like a business. "A man cannot purchase more than three women, unless he is from Syria, Turkey, or a Gulf nation," said one, named Abou Omar. "It's good for business," replied the other, Abou Anas. "A Saudi buyer has transport and food costs that a member of the Islamic State does not. He has a higher quota to make his purchases profitable.

Hopefully, we will not see a road named after ISIS (the group currently in power) or its leader(s) in some part of the ME