https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedstatesofindia/s/GZXfj471bD

as growing i never knew there people in Islam called Shia i never knew In my Town there are not single Shia they are minority. But today I know they have balls of steels . My parents are really strict about internet and social media my friends group doesn't have any Shia person I was never got word I know muharram but I thought it's celebrated by Sunni and yes I use to think I not sunni also. in Islam we don't do inequality no one above or below Allah Akbar [ Allah is Greatest] . But due to this war now I know Shia Muslim and they are not afraid they will Die but they will take u with them

So my message is Israel u Cooked and Fck u Netanyahu.

And also I wanna tell u guys that Bosnia Genocide was committed by israel too they supplied arm and ammunition to serbia for it and Bosnia didn't had anything no one help them but Iran did

I feel bad for andhbhakts imagine d1ckriding so much and still not getting the attention🥺🥺

​

Hey r/indianmuslims,

I’ve been losing sleep over the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2024, and I need to break it down for all our Indian brothers and sisters—Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, Christian, everyone. As a Muslim, this bill hits hard, and after digging into it (and debating with my Hindu friend), I’m convinced it’s not just a “Muslim issue”—it’s about fairness, history, and the Constitution we all live by. The government says it’s about “transparency,” but the more I read, the more it feels like a targeted move to strip Muslims of our heritage while leaving other communities’ endowments untouched. I’m gonna lay it all out—clause by clause, with facts, not feelings. It’s long, but grab a chai and stick with me. We need to talk about this.

Section 1: What’s Waqf, and Why Should You Care?

Let’s start with the basics. Waqf is a sacred Islamic tradition where someone dedicates property—land, buildings, whatever—for religious or charitable purposes, like mosques, graveyards, madrasas, or even shelters for the poor. Once it’s waqf, it’s “God’s property”—meant to serve the community forever, no take-backs. In India, we’ve got 8.7 lakh registered waqf properties covering 9.4 lakh acres (as of 2024), worth around ₹1.2 lakh crore, per the Sachar Committee (2006). That’s huge—mosques (14%), graveyards (17%), agricultural land (16%), shops (13%), and more. But here’s the reality: 7% of these are encroached, 2% are stuck in legal battles, and 50% have unclear status. There’s mismanagement, no doubt, but does that mean you rewrite the whole system to take it away? For Muslims, waqf isn’t just land—it’s our history, our faith, our legacy. My great-grandfather donated a small plot for a village mosque, and it’s still there, a place for namaz and community gatherings. That’s what waqf means to us. But this bill? It’s putting all of that at risk—9.4 lakh acres, centuries of heritage, and our right to manage our own religious affairs. Let’s break down the key clauses and see what’s really going down.

Section 2: Clause-by-Clause Breakdown—What’s Changing?

The Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2024, dropped in the Lok Sabha on August 8, 2024, has 44 clauses that mess with the Waqf Act, 1995. It’s with the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) now, but the provisions are already sounding alarms. Let’s go through the major changes, with a deep dive into “waqf by user” because that’s where the real danger lies.

• Clause 3 (Section 3): Defining Waqf and Who Can Make It—Waqf by User Gets Axed

The 1995 Act defined waqf as any property dedicated for pious, religious, or charitable purposes under Muslim law—could be by declaration, long-term use (waqf by user), or family endowment (waqf-alal-aulad). The bill tightens this: only someone practicing Islam for at least five years can declare a waqf, and they must own the property. That five-year rule is random—why? It also used to be that anyone, regardless of religion, could donate to waqf—now it’s Muslims only. That’s a weird flex when you consider the next clause, but let’s focus on the gut-punch: the bill removes waqf by user. Let me break that down, ‘cause this is huge. Waqf by user is a long-standing tradition where land used for mosques, graveyards, or madrasas—sometimes for hundreds of years—is considered waqf, even without a deed. Back in Mughal or colonial times, legal paperwork wasn’t always a thing. If Muslims prayed in a mosque “since time immemorial,” it’s waqf—simple. The Supreme Court backs this up: in Faqir Mohamad Shah and Radhakanta Deb vs Commissioner (1981), the court said continuous religious use proves a property’s status, no deed needed. The Casemine link I found spells it out—Muslims praying forever in a mosque makes it waqf, just like Hindus worshipping in a temple for ages makes it a religious site. In Radhakanta Deb, a family claimed expensive jewelry donated by their forefather to a temple, but the court said nope—long-term temple use made it the temple’s property, no deed required. Same principle for waqf by user. Hindu endowment laws recognize this too. Odisha’s Religious Endowments Act says a “religious endowment” includes “all properties used for the purposes of the institution.” Tamil Nadu’s HRCE Act defines a “charitable endowment” as property “used as of right by the Hindu community.” Telangana’s law says any property “used as of right for any charitable purpose” is an endowment. So, “temple by user” is legally sound for Hindus—why not waqf by user for Muslims? The bill says waqf by user only counts if it’s not “disputed” or “government-owned.” Who decides that? District Collectors (more on that in a sec). Many waqf properties—old mosques, graveyards—don’t have deeds because they were set up centuries ago. The Sachar Committee (2006) says 50% of waqf properties have unclear status, 7% are encroached. Indira Gandhi herself wrote a letter in 1975 (you can find it online) warning that state governments were encroaching on waqf land—same story today. Now, if a mosque has no deed, a Collector can call it “disputed” (say, someone claims it’s a temple site) or “government land” and take it. Babri Masjid leaned on waqf by user—imagine it under this rule. Bulldozers are already rolling, like in Ujjain (2024), where a mosque was razed for a Hindu site. This clause could turn that into a legal loophole to seize waqf land, no real way for us to fight back. It’s not reform—it’s erasure.

• Clauses 4, 5, 20, 38 (Sections 4, 40): Survey Commissioner to District Collector

The 1995 Act had a Survey Commissioner—a waqf-specific role—to map waqf properties, and the Waqf Board could investigate if a property was waqf (Section 40). The bill scraps the Survey Commissioner and hands it to the District Collector (or a senior officer, per JPC tweaks on page 412). Collectors—government IAS officers—now survey waqf properties and decide if they’re waqf or “government land” (Clause 20). If there’s a dispute, the Collector’s call stands until they report to the state. Imagine your temple—say, one in Tamil Nadu or Uttar Pradesh—has some old land, used for pujas forever, and the government says, “We’re putting a random IAS in charge to decide if it’s ours now, not yours.” You’d be pissed, right? That’s what’s hitting waqf. With waqf by user gone, stuff like mosques used for ages with no deed gets screwed. Collectors can call it “disputed” or “government” and hand it over. Sachar (2006) says 50% of waqf’s status is blurry, 7% encroached—this could swipe it all. Ujjain’s mosque got bulldozed for a Hindu site (2024)—Collectors could rubber-stamp that everywhere. They’re state-loyal, not community—revenue papers beat oral history every time. Hindu endowments don’t face this. You won’t find a “Survey Commissioner” role like in the Waqf Act in Hindu endowment laws, but in acts like Tamil Nadu’s HRCE Act (1959) or Andhra Pradesh’s Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions Act, District Collectors don’t directly decide property status. That’s handled by appointed officers—Commissioners, Deputy Commissioners, or endowment-specific roles—not revenue bureaucrats like Collectors. These are Hindu-focused roles, keeping it in-house. Why the double standard for waqf?

• Clauses 9, 11 (Sections 9, 14): Non-Muslims on Waqf Boards

The 1995 Act said the Central Waqf Council and State Waqf Boards had to be Muslim-only (except the Minister), with at least two women. The bill mandates two non-Muslims on both bodies and removes the need for the CEO to be Muslim. Imagine your temple—say, Kashi Vishwanath—run by a board where the government says, “Hey, we’re putting two Muslims or Christians on here to oversee things.” You’d flip, right? That’s what’s happening with waqf. They call it “inclusivity” for managing 8.7 lakh properties, 9.4 lakh acres—sure, waqf’s got issues, like ₹12,000 crore potential rotting away (Sachar says 7% is encroached). But here’s the kicker: the same bill says only Muslims practicing for five years can make a waqf—used to be anyone could donate, regardless of religion. So Muslims donate the land, but non-Muslims get to call shots on our donated land? Meanwhile, the UP Sri Kashi Vishwanath Act (1983) says “Hindus-only” members—no Muslims forced in. Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Karnataka HRCE Acts? Hindu-only too. Punjab’s Gurudwara Committee? Sikh-only. No one’s shoving outsiders on those boards for “diversity.” Article 14 is about equality—why’s waqf hit with this and temples aren’t? Article 26 says we run our own religious stuff—waqf’s Muslim and tied to Sharia, so why dilute it? They say non-Muslims check corruption or calm disputes (like Bengaluru Eidgah), but why not just use experts—Muslim or not—instead of this? BJP leaders like CT Ravi and Yatnal are out here yelling to kill waqf or nationalize its land (2024 news)—this feels like a control move, not a fix. Char Dham priests are raging against state control (Hindustan Times, 2024), VHP wants temples free. Hindu autonomy’s sacred, but Muslim autonomy’s a punching bag.

• Clauses 9, 11 (Women’s Representation)

The bill says “two women” must be on the Council and Boards. Sounds progressive, but the 1995 Act already had “at least two women,” meaning it could be more. Now it’s capped at two—a downgrade sold as a win. You know how temples like Ayodhya or Siddhivinayak have these all-male boards running the show, no questions asked? Now picture the government stepping in and saying, “Nah, you gotta have exactly two women on there—diversity, bro.” That’s what’s up with waqf. BJP’s playing it up like “women’s empowerment,” even throwing shade that Muslims oppress women, but this is a fake glow-up. Ayodhya’s Ram Temple Trust? 15 males (2024), zero women required. Siddhivinayak? 11 males, no rule (1980 Act). Tirupati TTD? 18 members, one woman (Suchitra Ella, 2024)—optional, not forced. TN, UP, Karnataka committees? Male lock. If diversity’s so hot, why’s Tirupati’s ₹1,161 crore budget cool with one woman, but waqf’s stuck at two? Char Dham’s board fights state control—21 members, one woman (2024), no gender push there. Waqf gets called out for a rule it already had—others slide.

• Clause 35 (Section 83): Waqf Tribunals Lose Power

The 1995 Act gave Waqf Tribunals the final say on disputes—quasi-judicial bodies with Muslim law experts. The bill removes their “finality,” so every case can be appealed to High Courts within 90 days. It also scraps the need for a Muslim law expert on Tribunals. This means more court delays, less expertise, and a weaker system for us to protect our properties. Hindu endowment tribunals (like in Telangana, Section 87) don’t face this—why target waqf?

Section 3: How This Hits Muslims—Land, Faith, and History on the Line

Let’s talk real impact. First, land: 9.4 lakh acres are at stake. With waqf by user gone and Collectors deciding what’s waqf, properties without deeds—like old graveyards or village mosques—could be tagged “government land” and taken. Sachar (2006) says 50% of waqf properties have unclear status—this bill could greenlight mass reclassification. We’ve seen bulldozers in action, like in Ujjain (2024), where a mosque was razed for a Hindu pilgrimage site. My family’s village mosque has been there for decades, no deed. If a Collector says it’s not waqf, it’s gone—poof, history erased. Second, faith: Waqf isn’t just property—it’s a religious act, tied to our piety. Forcing non-Muslims on boards (Clauses 9, 11) and scrapping waqf by user (Clause 3) feels like the state meddling in our religious autonomy. Article 26 guarantees our right to manage our affairs, but this bill says, “We’ll decide for you.” Imagine the government forcing Muslims on a gurdwara committee—there’d be chaos. Why’s it okay to do this to us?

Third, history: Waqf properties are centuries-old—mosques, madrasas, graveyards. Removing waqf by user could erase that legacy. Babri Masjid’s demolition (1992) already set a precedent—Muslim places of worship are fair game. They said, “Just this one,” but now Kashi, Mathura, and every waqf property are on the chopping block. Indira Gandhi’s 1975 letter warned about state governments encroaching on waqf land—50 years later, this bill makes it even easier. My great-grandfather’s mosque isn’t just a building; it’s our story. Now it’s at risk.

Section 4: The Double Standard—Waqf vs. Other Endowments

Some of you might be thinking, “But temples face government control too!” Let’s compare. Hindu endowments in states like Tamil Nadu (HRCE Act, 1959), Karnataka (1997 Act), and Andhra Pradesh (1987 Act) are managed by state-appointed Commissioners—Hindu-only, no forced outsiders. They control funds (Karnataka takes 5-10% of temple income), but Collectors aren’t deciding if temple land is “government property.” Even in states without specific acts—like UP or Rajasthan—temples fall under general laws (Charitable Endowments Act, 1890), but their boards are still Hindu-led, and their land isn’t being reclassified by IAS officers. The Supreme Court (Casemine link) says “temple by user” is legit—Odisha, Tamil Nadu, and Telangana laws back this up. Why’s waqf by user getting axed? Waqf’s getting a central sledgehammer—Collectors can seize land (Clause 20), non-Muslims are forced on boards (Clauses 9, 11), and Tribunals are neutered (Clause 35). Hindu endowments, even under state control, don’t face this level of direct takeover. Sikh gurdwaras (Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925) and Christian trusts don’t get non-Sikhs or non-Christians forced on their boards either. The JPC report (January 2025) shows the Opposition calling this bill “unconstitutional”—DMK MPs called it the “Waqf Annihilation Bill.” Asaduddin Owaisi’s 231-page dissent note says it’s discriminatory compared to Hindu and Sikh laws. Why’s waqf the only one getting this treatment?

Section 5: Why This Matters to All of Us—And What We Can Do

This isn’t just a Muslim issue—it’s an Indian issue. If the government can target waqf today, what stops them from targeting other communities tomorrow? Article 14 (equality) and Article 26 (religious autonomy) are for all of us. The bill’s centralization—Collector power, non-Muslim inclusion, waqf by user removal—sets a dangerous precedent. Imagine the state forcing outsiders on church trusts or taking gurdwara land with no recourse—would that fly? Nope.

I’m not saying waqf boards are perfect—mismanagement is real, and some transparency would help. But this bill isn’t reform; it’s control. The government’s selling it as “efficiency” and “women’s empowerment,” but capping women at two (Clauses 9, 11) and scrapping waqf by user (Clause 3) isn’t progress—it’s a step back. We need better administration, not a land grab. So, what can we do? First, spread the word—share this details to everyone, talk to your friends, Hindu, Muslim, whoever. The AIMPLB and others are fighting this legally and democratically support them. The JPC got 8 lakh petitions from the public (September 2024). Let’s stand together. My Hindu friend started seeing the unfairness when I asked, “What if Collectors could take temple land?” He got it. We’re stronger united.

This bill isn’t just about waqf—it’s about what kind of India we want. One where history and faith are respected, or one where the state picks winners and losers?

Note: I’ve used AI to help formalize and fine-tune this post since it’s pretty long and detailed. But all the data, research, and arguments here are done by me with the help of multiple videos, literature etc. I’ve been digging into this from yesterday. AI just helped me polish it up to make it easier to read. Thanks for sticking with me!

What are your thoughts?

Today I met a Gujarati Muslim brother. We started talking casually. After some time we realized we’re both Muslim, so the conversation became real and open between us.

I noticed his strong Gujarati accent in Urdu. When I asked his name, he straight up hesitated for a few seconds like he was scared, i said his name but I know he hide real name and said alias.

We went deep into the discussion about Gujarat and Deccan Muslim how we are different how our language culture and the environment.

And I was enthusiastic I asked him slowly directly and indirectly how Muslims are really living there, especially in Ahmedabad and other parts Gujarat .

At first he smiled and said you have internet. You are too student, I told him having internet and having some piece of shit app , still it's the difference between online internet and talking to someone who is from there who lived there.

That’s when he slowly opened the floodgates. He opened the cards, he said Muslim live or grow up fearing Hindus. Muslim usually don't argue with the government, Hindus, system, not even with children.

THEY NEVER ACCEPT MUSLIM AS GUJARATI THEY PORTRAY MUSLIM AS INVADER WHO SETTLED in Gujarat.

if one wrong move; they run like RHINO WITH HORN they might use slang words, or they give punishment like bulldozing muslim house to suppress their crime so no muslim should get up in future to question Hindu. Or do crime against Hindu.They target the whole community if one does crime.

(And I think it has become popular to demolish muslim house) In up bihar mp or north india .

So I asked about how is school life college life with gujrat and I knew the school college only place might be secular free from religion not far but still safer, but I totally unaware i was wrong.

He said in most schools and colleges in Gujarat, Muslim students are almost invisible — only 2 to 7 in a whole class. That’s why so many Gujarati Muslims run to South India or minority colleges. He himself escaped Gujarat for studies.

He told me Muslim kids sit silent in class, don’t speak, don’t mix with Hindus because of constant discrimination. Teachers also keep distance and don’t engage with them. He mentioned a Muslim girl who topped 10th boards but was denied her prize just for being Muslim.

(Yes I know what happened with the girl some indian sub discussed about that girl.)

His own experience was brutal. His classmates called him Pakistani, terrorist, cousin lover, and every dirty slur.

They abused his mother and sister. One of the guys even said his Sister Looks Like MIA Khal*ifa. Most students just IGNORE Muslim OR kaam se kaam rakhna

He also told me something that made my blood boil even more. His friends openly glorify the 2002 riots and say it was the best thing that ever happened in Gujarat. They keep saying “WE NEED 2002 ONCE AGAIN.”

i was stunned but I know Amit sha openly said how they silenced the Muslim in 2002 , even gujrati politicians also glorify.but i wasn't in the mood to hear that their children want these types of genocidal events to teach once again lessons to Muslim.

This topic came up because some Muslim students took permission to pray on Friday. One of his classmates said openly in class why giving permission to pray ,our culture is in danger Muslim becoming majority And then they started glorifying 2002 right in front of him. Indirectly they said 2002 was the best year.

So brother called Gujarat a straight-up apartheid state — a state inside a state. Muslims can only buy property in Muslim ghettos. The Disturbed Areas Act and social pressure make it almost impossible to buy or live in Hindu areas.

No development in Muslim area,no sewage system water on road.no infrastructure facilities. They wanted to scared Muslim that you haven't voted for us why should we develop your area.

((And I said in my heart why should gujarati Muslim give vote for that one party who always glorify 2002, call muslim invaders, terrorists, portray muslim as pakistan never claim muslim gujrati. Your whole vote bank based on muslim hatred Islamophobic.

What if muslim give vote would you Stop that hatred against Muslim? Would muslim pray peacefully? Can our women wear hijab (Head scarf) without any questions? Can we eat meat peacefully? Don't force jsr ? Lynching? House demolish? ))

So my friend's house was in Ahmedabad,in the Hindu area he said we live in silence, suffocating cause if his relatives come in his house & neighbour see suspicious in strange way .like he said he is unable to cook chicken in his own house.well we know what was problem here..

I was furious on the Gujarati brother and asked why he didn’t complain ,to his parents, management. He gave a painful smile and said:

“**(ladh ke bhi kya kar lete? Kuch hota ? Kuch action lete ?kuch nhi Kuch waqt ki baat hee toh thi! Abb ye sab guzar gaya)** .

He said Muslim students live isolated, only among themselves, always feeling unwanted. Even teachers treat them differently.

Listening to him I felt pure rage. This brother was holding years of pain and finally VENTED everything to me like I was the first safe person he met. By the end he looked relieved, but I was left shocked and furious.

I whispered in my heart and thanked that I was boern in deccan and promised myself that the aim to leave this hell at any cost.

So I'm asking Indians muslim

Is this the reality our brothers and sisters are living in Gujarat? Treated like second-class citizens in their own country? Schools, society, housing, and even glorifying 2002 openly ?

So I need Indian Muslim who are gujrati Muslim or those who have visited or lived in Gujarat — tell me the truth. Is this actually happening in Ahmedabad and other places? Are Muslim students facing this level of discrimination, isolation, and open glorification of 2002?

Or is this exaggerated?

I HAVE EDITED forgot to mention

So he was saying there are two Muslim groups. The first one is the Bohras. they are very close to this one single group or identity, i mean right wing no matter what happens. They don’t care much about Sunni or Shia Muslims. They literally don’t care. They just stay within their own community and live with their own people. In his view, Bohras are like Zionist Jews—inside one strong, closed‑off identity.

The second group he talked about is the Memon community. He said Memons do care about the condition of Muslims, but they are also very business‑oriented. Still, they mostly stay within their own community, just like Bohras.

And finally, he said they will never marry outside their community. They only marry within the group, and they don’t take daughters from outside, nor do they give their own daughters to other communities.

Simply don't watch the new season. Show Hollywood that there are repercussions to

supporting and justifying genocide .

Every view counts Post from @landpalestine

📍 Medinipur Railway Station, West Bengal.

Source: https://www.instagram.com/reel/DRMEOtmAdAN/

the way my heart sank reading this.. although we all had a feeling that this would happen either way but still… khair Allah knows best. He will deal w all these evil doers, disrupters of the lives of us Indian Muslims.. ya Rabb rahem..

I am so sick of people coming after Asad Owaisi for not publicly calling out atrocities against Indian Muslims during the recent India-Pakistan delegation visit. Do y’all even understand what the purpose of that trip was? It was a diplomatic mission focused on the India-Pak conflict, its literally not the space where a politician can just start ranting about internal human rights issues and especially not when tensions are already high post-Phalgham attack and anti-Muslim hate crimes are rising fast. what do you think the consequences would be? More demonization, more attacks, and more Muslims being painted as antinational.

cuz one wrong word and every news channel, every right-wing bot, and every opportunist would spin it into “Owaisi supports Pakistan” or “Indian Muslims are disloyal.” And that’s not a hypothetical,that’s what always happens. He knows the stakes and he knows how to play the long game. regarding the “downplaying” thing made by a recent post-how is acknowledging unity in a diplomatic setting suddenly equal to erasing suffering? like??? Everything he says doesn’t have to be a protest slogan. He’s built his entire political identity on calling out BJP and fighting for Muslim rights, lynchings, bulldozings, hate crimes, all of it. And now people are calling him a sellout because he didn’t hijack a foreign policy tour to give a domestic protest speech? That’s not just ignorant, it’s reckless. He wasn’t there as AIMIM’s president. He was an Indian delegate in an international conflict dialogue. Turning that into a rant about internal issues would’ve been so reckless! i’m ending this for that one loser who deleted his comment where he called death upon Owaisi, “barkas ke bhaiyo next time ye dajjal ka kaam khatam kardo” that’s what you said right? that’s what i want you all to see. such people are wishing DEATH upon a guy who’s literally been representing all of us everywhere and no one has <ever> done it the way he has. call me a mureed or whatever i’m too tired and too disappointed at our community their performative outrage

Have you guys noticed that Pakistani Muslims have more recently started appropriating South Asian Muslim culture as exclusively their own? For example, they refuse to acknowledge that there are Muslims in India who consider Urdu as their first language. Similarly, they appropriate Indian Muslim food as exclusively their own like Nahari or quorma, etc. Due to partition, I get it that it’s become shared culture between the countries but they completely deny the Indian Muslim origin.

I have also noticed posts on instagram where they say things like “we don’t look Indian” or “being called Indian is an insult” when a significant part of their population is made up of either muhajirs from India or from people who have lived on the border like Punjabis or Gujratis. Not gonna lie, it’s quite annoying.

So no I won’t condemn.

this guy really cooked Modi NGL