A better Islamist who banned terror
Not exactly a bleeding-heart liberal, but open-minded by religious standards, Maulana Marghubur Rahman — the 96-year-old influential rector of Islamic seminary Darul Uloom — died on Wednesday at his ancestral home in UP’s Bijnor.
A young Rahman had waged an offensive from the seminary against the Muslim League and Mohammed Ali Jinnah’s call for a separate Muslim state. Indian Muslims, he would argue, belonged to India.
In February 2008, while delivering a speech, Rahman had invoked a Quranic principle to declare killing of innocents as anti-Islamic, which became the foundation of Deoband’s famous fatwa (edict) against terror, first reported by HT.
He was the spiritual force behind Rajya Sabha member Mahmood Madni’s initiative against terror. Rahman had cited a Quranic verse that expressly forbid killing of innocents. This became the basis of the anti-terror fatwa.
Born in 1914 in Bijnor, Rahman joined Darul Uloom Deoband in 1929 and came under the influence of nationalist clerics, such as Hussain Ahmed Madani, the great grandfather of Mahmood Madni.
Darul had vehemently opposed the two-nation theory that was the basis for the creation of Pakistan.
Rahman was deeply influenced by pro-Congress Husain Ahmad Madni, who took on Maulana Abul Ala Maududi, the religious fountain head for Jinnah’s ideas.
Hindustan Times



(12 votes, average: 3.83 out of 5)

shan Reply:
December 12th, 2010 at 9:07 pm
@Zia, okay I commemnd the nationalist in him ,but these are the people who should be history,because he could not reform islam , or he wouldn’t dare to ,nor did he modernise islam , nor did he question the authenticity and veracity of quoran, and lastly he didnot RE EVALUATE quoran in the light of seismic changes in beleif system brought about by science. Here is the difference. When Bishop of Durham was asked about RESURRECTION , he said he does not beleive resurrection
in physical sense , but more of a symbolic. If the late rahman said something of that order he could have ushered in a cataclysmic change for good in islam. like he could have said we need allah , and that’s it , no need for haz to fill the coffers of imperial arab , eating pork has nothing to do with allah, and life and society should be dictated according to the needs of the time , thus no nikah no talaq but civil marriage and civil divorce.
[Reply]
G. Mustafa Reply:
December 12th, 2010 at 10:41 pm
Your demand is stretched one, he was afterall a mullah not a socialist/activist. Religious freedom are confined well within limits, crossing that is taboo.
[Reply]
shan Reply:
December 13th, 2010 at 4:36 pm
@Mustafa, religion need not DRAW THE PERIMETER OF FREEDOM , it is no longer religion then , which is supposed to be the quest for meaning of life , that is draws the perimeter IN ONE PARTICULAR RELIGION says it all about that religion and the kind of society it breeds.
Vinay Reply:
December 12th, 2010 at 11:38 pm
@Shan,
As far as marriage-divorce laws, government should have taken the bold decision. Don’t put the blame on this person. Regarding questioning the authenticity of quoran; your expectation is not reformation of Islam, instead a revolution. An ordinary religious head cannot do that. To me, one smaller irreversible step is better than 10 reversible ones. But he could have made an islamic scholar committee (or some such blah blah.. an eyewash) who can device some Islamic laws which help an average muslim fit better into the modern society’s requirements (like population control, rights of divorced woman). Some route, which does not hurt an average Muslim’s religious sentiments, at the same time relevant for today. It would have helped Muslims better.
[Reply]
A khan Reply:
December 13th, 2010 at 2:14 pm
@Vinay, Shan
Have you read the Quran? It is not fair to comment on something for which you dont possess any knowledge. Reform yourself and world will be reformed.
[Reply]
shan Reply:
December 13th, 2010 at 4:21 pm
I have read it , there are passage after passage , which are totally incompatible with modern day as are there IN EACH AND EVERY RELIGION, but people of all other faith bar ISLAM is open to that scrutiny , and accept SCIENCE as the defining principle , whereas in ISLAMIC QUOM this backwardness in thinking , this demented approach and TOTAL UNCONCERN FOR RATIONALITY is the root cause of islamic countries will continue to live at the mercy of SCIENTIFIC, SECULAR , LIBERAL WEST.
Shakil Ahamed Reply:
December 20th, 2010 at 6:18 pm
Dear Shan
I respect your thought as a human being that is different from other.
but wht you have read is what u want to read and wht u understand is wht u wnt to understand.
but bright minded and read what u read try to find the context then u will be able to under stand. and u will be able to understand any book of religion.
ram autar Reply:
December 13th, 2010 at 5:02 pm
shan be aware of brahmns,
There were 80 % Brahmins in Budhas’s Bhikku Sangha, but they only ditched and killed the Budha. Emperor Ashoka had to dislodge and remove the pious saffron robe (chiwar) of around 75,000 Brahmin Bhikkus. Brahmins troubled and even killed the great leaders who walked on Budha’s path like Kanishka, Harshwardhan, Namdev, Ravidas, Kabir, Tukaram, Shivaji, Tegbahadur Singh, Arjun Dev, Mahatma Phule, Shahu Maharaj, Sambhaji, and even Dr. Ambedkar. In the beginning Dr. Ambedkar didn’t hate the Brahmins but after the incident of Maratha people program at Pune (1942), he also declared that Brahmins can’t be anybody’s friend. Therefore, we should paste everywhere that “Beware of Brahmins (i.e. aliens in India”). It should be written on all the walls of all the cities
[Reply]
Ankit Reply:
December 14th, 2010 at 11:24 am
Two things:
1. What have you been reading?
2. If you actually count the number of ‘brahmins’ in India, they would be less than 20%. I don’t have any figures on their wealth, but since none of the richest or powerful people in India happen to be ‘Brahmin’ (Ambani, Wadia, Gandhi family, Azim Premji, Mallya, Manmohan Singh, yes all non-brahmins) I can assume that brahmins don’t hold all the wealth, and all the power.
Yes moron, India is not ruled by brahmins, but a collection of people called Indians. GETTIT!!! (BTW if that helps, Im a Brahmin)
Ziauddin Shafi Reply:
December 14th, 2010 at 1:21 am
It will take some more time for you to appreciate that Indian Muslims are writing a new chapter in Islamic history. In India they are neither a majority nor a mini minority and are struggling against all odds in marking socio-economic space for themselves peacefully in their country under a hostile atmosphere. Moderate nationalists like Maulana Abul Kalam Azad to a great extent and Maulana Marghoob to a lesser extent have chalked out a spiritual-scientific path for post-independence Indian Muslims to follow. Hard-liners of all hues would find it hard to digest – and that’s a tragedy which Indian Muslims have to cope with courageously.
[Reply]
Binoy Hegde Reply:
December 14th, 2010 at 1:35 am
Muslims would have been far better off had they followed Maulana Abdul Kalam Azad’s advice.
It is time to blame others – hard liners or soft liners or one liners — There is no substitiute for hard work, persistence, accomplishments, achievemnets. Indians of all caste nd creed respect Dr Abdul Kalam. Children of all religions went gaga over him. (although many Muslims resented him). India has demonstrated time and again that merit and accomplishments will be respected and recognized, whereevr it comes from. All respect Manmohan Singh. Tos ome extent, all respect Antony for his simplicitya nd uncorruptability. Different rleigions, all Indians, all contributing…
The targedy of Indian Muslims (as all other Msulims worldwide) is a self-inflicted one, constantly refusing to be with the flow, to integrate, to be a part of teh vibrant community. Trains have left so many times, and you guys stayed in the station. It is still not too late… Again do not blame others.. Whom will you blame for Muslims’ situation in all other ISlamic countries – Pakistan, Yemen, Morocco, Egypt, Somalia, Chad, Sudan — are Muslims rising there to top achievements …and they are nort rising there because some majority is suppressing them????