Updated on Saturday, October 16, 2010, 12:23
Zeenews Bureau
Lucknow: The executive committee of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) is meeting in Lucknow right now to deliberate on the recommendations of its legal committee to approach the Supreme Court against the Allahabad High Court verdict in the Ayodhya title suits.
The 51-member committee and some special invitees like former Justice Sagir Ahmed and chairman of the Sunni Central Waqf Board Zafar Ahmed Farooqui, are expected to discuss in detail the High Court verdict as well as the recommendations made in its light by the legal committee of the body at its meeting held earlier this month in Delhi, sources in the board said.
The implications of the verdict as well as the doubts of the members would be discussed at the meeting before taking a final decision on whether to give a go-ahead to the Sunni Waqf Board which had been a party to the case to appeal in the court as also to decide to get involved in the case directly.
"As certain Muslim leaders, including members of the Board, have publicly opined that the matter needed to be resolved out of court through reconciliation, it would also be taken up but a final decision would be taken on majority view," sources said.
"All the members including those favouring a negotiated settlement would put forth their views before the committee but there are no chances of any discord over the issue as it has been the tradition of the Board that the majority view should prevail," they said.
However, they added that even if the majority view is in favour of going in for an appeal in the Supreme Court against the verdict, efforts can still go on simultaneously for a settlement through reconciliation.
"Even if the solution is reached through dialogue it would still require a legal stamp or better if the government enacts a law in keeping with it so that the dispute is ended once and for all," sources said.
"The legality of the case has already been discussed at the earlier meeting .... the meeting would also have to keep in mind the consequences of the verdict," sources said, adding that going to the Supreme Court was also a legal necessity to safeguard the interests of the community in future.
Besides deliberating on the Ayodhya case, today's meeting would also finalise the venue of the next conference besides taking up the routine affairs, sources added.
(With PTI inputs)
AIMPLB should take the Karsevaks' demolition of Babri Masjid in the same spirit as the destruction of idols in Mecca by Mohammad. They can't have different morals about justification of the same thing.
MR. VENU THERE IS BIG DIFERENCE BETWEEN PEOPLE WHO SPREAD ISLAM IN MEECA AND THE KARSEVAK DEMOLISING THE MOSQUE SO ISLAM SPREAD FROM ARABIA TO EUROPE AND ASIA I HOPE YOU UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BRO
sam - mumbai
Dear Sam, Islam and all Muslims justify Mohammad's destruction of idols. In absolute terms, destroying another's place of worship or mode of worship is wrong. But often things don't happen in a vacuum and there is a history behind all incidents and history may justify what may not be morally justifiable. Like you can't kill a person but if it is done in self-defense, it is different. Therefore as a historical event what Mohammad did has to be accepted as a reality and we move on. Can't the same position be taken by Muslims on the Ram Janmabhoomi issue? If they wish to turn the clock back and have their mosque rebuilt in Ram Janmabhoomi, it would probably be as futile as putting the idols back in Kaaba.
Venu, The removal of idols from Mecca were not Hindu Deities but the Idols of Arabia which they use to believe. Are you interested in them then go and bring them and keep in India. I think i should tell you one more thing, when some people like you came to destroy Mecca during the period of Grand father of Mohammed then Allah send on the birds with a piece of stones and each stone was dropped on the elephant which worked like a missile. So stop talking stupid and justify things with assuming.
Dear Mus, The point is that the idols belonged to another religion, whether Hinduism or not, and Muslims have no compunction in calling a person who destroyed the idols of another religion as a model for humanity. If during the time of Mohammad's grandfather Allah protected the idols, then what happened during the time of Mohammad? Did Allah have a change of mind? Or was the action of Mohammad passed off as having the sanction of Allah?
http://www.zeenews.com/news661766.html
Zeenews Bureau
Lucknow: The executive committee of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) is meeting in Lucknow right now to deliberate on the recommendations of its legal committee to approach the Supreme Court against the Allahabad High Court verdict in the Ayodhya title suits.
The 51-member committee and some special invitees like former Justice Sagir Ahmed and chairman of the Sunni Central Waqf Board Zafar Ahmed Farooqui, are expected to discuss in detail the High Court verdict as well as the recommendations made in its light by the legal committee of the body at its meeting held earlier this month in Delhi, sources in the board said.
The implications of the verdict as well as the doubts of the members would be discussed at the meeting before taking a final decision on whether to give a go-ahead to the Sunni Waqf Board which had been a party to the case to appeal in the court as also to decide to get involved in the case directly.
"As certain Muslim leaders, including members of the Board, have publicly opined that the matter needed to be resolved out of court through reconciliation, it would also be taken up but a final decision would be taken on majority view," sources said.
"All the members including those favouring a negotiated settlement would put forth their views before the committee but there are no chances of any discord over the issue as it has been the tradition of the Board that the majority view should prevail," they said.
However, they added that even if the majority view is in favour of going in for an appeal in the Supreme Court against the verdict, efforts can still go on simultaneously for a settlement through reconciliation.
"Even if the solution is reached through dialogue it would still require a legal stamp or better if the government enacts a law in keeping with it so that the dispute is ended once and for all," sources said.
"The legality of the case has already been discussed at the earlier meeting .... the meeting would also have to keep in mind the consequences of the verdict," sources said, adding that going to the Supreme Court was also a legal necessity to safeguard the interests of the community in future.
Besides deliberating on the Ayodhya case, today's meeting would also finalise the venue of the next conference besides taking up the routine affairs, sources added.
(With PTI inputs)
AIMPLB should take the Karsevaks' demolition of Babri Masjid in the same spirit as the destruction of idols in Mecca by Mohammad. They can't have different morals about justification of the same thing.
MR. VENU THERE IS BIG DIFERENCE BETWEEN PEOPLE WHO SPREAD ISLAM IN MEECA AND THE KARSEVAK DEMOLISING THE MOSQUE SO ISLAM SPREAD FROM ARABIA TO EUROPE AND ASIA I HOPE YOU UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BRO
sam - mumbai
Dear Sam, Islam and all Muslims justify Mohammad's destruction of idols. In absolute terms, destroying another's place of worship or mode of worship is wrong. But often things don't happen in a vacuum and there is a history behind all incidents and history may justify what may not be morally justifiable. Like you can't kill a person but if it is done in self-defense, it is different. Therefore as a historical event what Mohammad did has to be accepted as a reality and we move on. Can't the same position be taken by Muslims on the Ram Janmabhoomi issue? If they wish to turn the clock back and have their mosque rebuilt in Ram Janmabhoomi, it would probably be as futile as putting the idols back in Kaaba.
Venu, The removal of idols from Mecca were not Hindu Deities but the Idols of Arabia which they use to believe. Are you interested in them then go and bring them and keep in India. I think i should tell you one more thing, when some people like you came to destroy Mecca during the period of Grand father of Mohammed then Allah send on the birds with a piece of stones and each stone was dropped on the elephant which worked like a missile. So stop talking stupid and justify things with assuming.
Dear Mus, The point is that the idols belonged to another religion, whether Hinduism or not, and Muslims have no compunction in calling a person who destroyed the idols of another religion as a model for humanity. If during the time of Mohammad's grandfather Allah protected the idols, then what happened during the time of Mohammad? Did Allah have a change of mind? Or was the action of Mohammad passed off as having the sanction of Allah?
http://www.zeenews.com/news661766.html
No comments:
Post a Comment