Loksabha has passed the triple talaq bill on 28th December 2018. It was a mere formality once Supreme court has passed the judgement pertaining the practice. It is very easy to decipher the political logic of the bill and it is also easy to predict that effectiveness of bill hinges on inclination of potential victims to come forward defying the beliefs.
What is the political logic of the bill? It is a victory through symbols for the party which has risen on the heatwaves of rhetoric around symbols. BJP has successfully constructed and peddled the theme of 'Muslim appeasement'. As per this logic, Muslims have been given undeserved benefits. One of the 'benefit', perceived by those who enforce this concept, is Muslim marriage act which allows Muslim men to have more than one wife and allows them to divorce the wife using triple talaq. BJP, which now has to take on the 'Muslim appeasement' , has to take away the undeserving benefits.
But it is inconvenient to be so blunt about the objective. So the triple talaq bill and preceding debate started under the guise of 'helping the exploited Muslim women'. The political astuteness of BJP was evident when the trojan horse of 'Winning the Hindu sentiments by hurting the Muslim sentiments' was forced behind the grievance of a Muslim woman. The trojan horse will never be publicly owned by the elite leadership of BJP, but the public outreach social media of BJP will be boldly riding on it.
Triple talaq has no place in the modern world. There is no doubt about it. But such practices persist through the beliefs which are conscious or subconscious choices of individuals. Individual choices are sacrosanct building blocks of society, provided they generate non-lethal effects limited to individuals participating in it. Individuals have to change their underlying choice which will subsequently change the practice. The law will be of limited effect if it is not aligning with dominantly enforced choice. The Sabarimala verdict and subsequent developments have shown it again.
Muslims are in dire need of reform, there is no doubt about it. The critical examinations of religion under the light of modern values of individualism is yet to happen at radical level in Islam. There is a liberal fringe in Islam, which embraces modernity and skirts the process of reform. In India, such liberal fringe is almost absent. (Husain Dalwai is an example than comes to mind.)
In the absence of inside-out process of reform within Islam, external forces will only harden the embrace of age-old practices. Any external attempt will be seen as an attack on Islam and unless state brute-forces the implementation at all cost, it will not be able to pass-through.
I do not think BJP will enforce the implementation. In fact, triple talaq is likely to be reflective of social fault-lines among Muslims. The relatively modern Muslims are unlikely to be practicing it anyway. And the relatively backward one practicing it are hardly to come under legal radar. But the heat generated in the fight for symbols and practices allows BJP to appease it's core hardline Hindu base.
The hurt it has provided to those who value their Muslim identity (hardliners or nationalist) is likely to shape their stance in upcoming Ayodhya verdict and subsequent heatwave around it. Since they have been defeated in triple talaq, they have to resist in Ayodhya issue. It works in BJP's favor.
BJP knows how to ride on the tide of fights of beliefs. This time it is no different. The fact that there is no hard resistance like Sabarimala shows that the core premise of exploitation of women is more likely to be hollow, than more sinister possibility of very high level of exploitation where exploited women are utterly voiceless. The political acumen of winning through non-issue is politically brilliant, even though one laments over real changes.
Any teary eyed logic of seeing BJP as a true champion of constitution falls on the face if one compares the Sabarimala and triple talaq. Both the intervention in religions by modern democracy. But BJP is on the side of democracy in one case and on the side of belief in another. And in none of the cases, it has a position which is logically consistent.
Triple talaq is invalid since any relation between any two Indians has to have same Indian set of laws based on equal rights of every individual. The question of whether this practice is core or integral to Islam is beside the point.
What is the political logic of the bill? It is a victory through symbols for the party which has risen on the heatwaves of rhetoric around symbols. BJP has successfully constructed and peddled the theme of 'Muslim appeasement'. As per this logic, Muslims have been given undeserved benefits. One of the 'benefit', perceived by those who enforce this concept, is Muslim marriage act which allows Muslim men to have more than one wife and allows them to divorce the wife using triple talaq. BJP, which now has to take on the 'Muslim appeasement' , has to take away the undeserving benefits.
But it is inconvenient to be so blunt about the objective. So the triple talaq bill and preceding debate started under the guise of 'helping the exploited Muslim women'. The political astuteness of BJP was evident when the trojan horse of 'Winning the Hindu sentiments by hurting the Muslim sentiments' was forced behind the grievance of a Muslim woman. The trojan horse will never be publicly owned by the elite leadership of BJP, but the public outreach social media of BJP will be boldly riding on it.
Triple talaq has no place in the modern world. There is no doubt about it. But such practices persist through the beliefs which are conscious or subconscious choices of individuals. Individual choices are sacrosanct building blocks of society, provided they generate non-lethal effects limited to individuals participating in it. Individuals have to change their underlying choice which will subsequently change the practice. The law will be of limited effect if it is not aligning with dominantly enforced choice. The Sabarimala verdict and subsequent developments have shown it again.
Muslims are in dire need of reform, there is no doubt about it. The critical examinations of religion under the light of modern values of individualism is yet to happen at radical level in Islam. There is a liberal fringe in Islam, which embraces modernity and skirts the process of reform. In India, such liberal fringe is almost absent. (Husain Dalwai is an example than comes to mind.)
In the absence of inside-out process of reform within Islam, external forces will only harden the embrace of age-old practices. Any external attempt will be seen as an attack on Islam and unless state brute-forces the implementation at all cost, it will not be able to pass-through.
I do not think BJP will enforce the implementation. In fact, triple talaq is likely to be reflective of social fault-lines among Muslims. The relatively modern Muslims are unlikely to be practicing it anyway. And the relatively backward one practicing it are hardly to come under legal radar. But the heat generated in the fight for symbols and practices allows BJP to appease it's core hardline Hindu base.
The hurt it has provided to those who value their Muslim identity (hardliners or nationalist) is likely to shape their stance in upcoming Ayodhya verdict and subsequent heatwave around it. Since they have been defeated in triple talaq, they have to resist in Ayodhya issue. It works in BJP's favor.
BJP knows how to ride on the tide of fights of beliefs. This time it is no different. The fact that there is no hard resistance like Sabarimala shows that the core premise of exploitation of women is more likely to be hollow, than more sinister possibility of very high level of exploitation where exploited women are utterly voiceless. The political acumen of winning through non-issue is politically brilliant, even though one laments over real changes.
Any teary eyed logic of seeing BJP as a true champion of constitution falls on the face if one compares the Sabarimala and triple talaq. Both the intervention in religions by modern democracy. But BJP is on the side of democracy in one case and on the side of belief in another. And in none of the cases, it has a position which is logically consistent.
Triple talaq is invalid since any relation between any two Indians has to have same Indian set of laws based on equal rights of every individual. The question of whether this practice is core or integral to Islam is beside the point.
Similarly as long as Sabarimala temple is managed by government, equal access has to be provided. The requirement is to take government out of management of places of worship. But then such places, temples or dargahs, will have right for discriminatory access within the ambit of constitutional governance.
It is evident that BJP has not taken the stance of providing a sound and logical basis to laws. But more worryingly no political voice in India seems to have taken this stance. In fact, it is BJP's ideological faction that has demanded the freeing of temples from the government management. But their argument of separation of state and religion stops at Hinduism as they see India as Hindu-rashtra. (One of the common mistake BJP's critiques makes is to say that 'BJP wants to make India a Hindu-rashtra.) More correctly, BJP sees India as a Hindu-Israel, where all other religions are governed by state which is vessel of Hindu religion.
Triple talaq bill is a move in the grand dream of Hindu hardliners in India. Well played! Let's hold the breath for times to come!!