Residents welcome reduction in use of loudspeakers at mosques
Mumbai: Many residents living in densely populated areas and in the vicinity of mosques have welcomed the silence or reduced decibel levels of loudspeakers in mosques.
Several residents TOI spoke to on Sunday said they felt a positive change as the mosques in their neighbourhoods either muted loudspeakers or cut down decibels to the permissible limit (55 decibels during daytime and 45 decibels at night).
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
This allows elderly persons, students, and bedridden patients much-needed relief.
"I stay hardly 200 metres away from a couple of mosques at Kurla Pipe Road. I don't see any decrease in the number of devotees in mosques after azaan stopped being amplified through loudspeakers. This is a relief and should be welcomed," said Mohammed Tarique.
Tarique added that he is a practising Muslim who regularly prays five times a day but does not miss the sound of azaan via loudspeakers.
Tarique recalled a trend of many mosques which amplified through loudspeakers not just the azaan but even Friday sermons of the imams. "What was the need to make the whole mohalla listen to sermons delivered inside mosques? ... I am glad it has stopped now that loudspeakers are muted or decibels reduced," said Tarique.
Kalina resident Abraham Mathai welcomed the move. "I used to put earplugs during azaan on loudspeakers.
Now it is a relief for everyone, including students and elderly people. I congratulate even those elders in the community who back this positive move," said Mathai.
Khursheed Siddiqui, general secretary, Masjid and Madrassa Mohammadiya at Vikhroli, said that soon after Bombay high court observed in Jan 2025 that "use of loudspeakers is not an essential part of religions", he called for a meeting of elders and explained why loudspeakers' decibel levels needed to be brought down to permissible limit.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
"There were some who argued why only mosques needed to comply with the court's decision, but now we all see the benefits of not amplifying the azaan through loudspeakers," said Siddiqui.
Mira Road resident Syed Zafar Ahmed lives in a cosmopolitan locality. "If I felt irritated at high decibels of azaan, how would non-Muslims have felt? I am glad many mosques have themselves removed the loudspeakers or are following the court's guidelines on the use of loudspeakers," said Ahmed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
24 minutes ago
- Time of India
After Israeli bombings, Iran signals strategic shift on nuclear commitments; mulls Non-Proliferation Treaty exit
A man looks at flames rising from an oil storage facility after it appeared to have been struck by an Israeli strike in Tehran. (Pic credit: AP) As Israel continues to target nuclear sites in Iran, Tehran on Monday said that its parliamentarians are preparing a bill that will push it towards exiting the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. According to a report by Reuters, Iran's foreign ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said, "In light of recent developments, we will take an appropriate decision. Government has to enforce parliament bills, but such a proposal is just being prepared and we will coordinate in the later stages with parliament." Meanwhile, he also reiterated Tehran's official stance against developing nuclear weapons. Is Iran violating NPT? This comes amid escalating tensions between Israel and Iran as both countries continue to launch waves of missiles at each other. The timing of this statement is also crucial, as Israel alleged that Iran is on the verge of building a nuclear bomb. However, Iran denied the allegations, asserting that its nuclear programme is peaceful. Iran's President Masoud Pezeshkian echoed that position on Monday, saying nuclear arms violate the country's core religious principles. But last week, the IAEA said that Iran violated its NPT obligations. Baghaei said the recent Israeli attacks and the IAEA resolution played a direct role in Tehran's strategic reassessment. "Those voting for the resolution prepared the ground for the attack," he said. The 1970 treaty restricts signatories from pursuing nuclear weapons in exchange for access to civilian nuclear technology and oversight by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Proposal in initial stages According to Reuters' report, no decision on quitting the NPR has been made yet, but the proposal is in initial stages of legal process. Meanwhile, Baghaei criticised Israel's own nuclear stance, highlighting that the country is not a signatory to the NPT and is widely believed to possess an undeclared nuclear arsenal. "The Zionist regime is the only possessor of weapons of mass destruction in the region," he said.
Time of India
31 minutes ago
- Time of India
View: Chips won the Cold War. Rare earths may win the next
By David Fickling In retrospect, the symbolism of the moment was foreboding. On May 15, 2019, President Donald Trump signed an executive order banning US firms from doing business with Chinese telecommunications companies, including Huawei Technologies Co. Five days after that first broadside in a brewing trade-and-technology war, President Xi Jinping was photographed touring a factory producing rare-earth magnets. Such devices, his visit seemed to imply, could be a geopolitical weapon for China quite as potent as advanced semiconductors are for the US. Six years later, those battle lines are hardening. In the first major US-China trade dispute of Trump's second term, Beijing was able to use its control of rare earths to force Washington to a deal last week. The magnets produced from them are essential for the lightweight, powerful motors driving everything from automated car seats to guided missiles. After the US imposed its first round of tariffs in April, China started limiting export permits, causing US manufacturers to warn of imminent shutdowns. 'FULL MAGNETS, AND ANY NECESSARY RARE EARTHS, WILL BE SUPPLIED, UP FRONT, BY CHINA,' Trump said in a social media post Wednesday, announcing the trade deal had been finalized. Beneath the all-caps boastfulness there's a worrying note of desperation. America has been caught napping. Beijing's response to being frozen out of the microprocessor ecosystem was an all-out drive to bridge the technological gap. State-owned chip foundry Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corp. has deployed $33.5 billion on capital expenditures, and $4 billion on research and development, since the middle of 2019. Huawei spends 180 billion yuan ($25 billion) on R&D every year, founder Ren Zhengfei said in a recent interview. Just 12 months ago, the government created a separate $47.5 billion semiconductor investment fund. The US chip fortress still looks pretty impregnable, barring an unexpected DeepSeek moment. Although Huawei is reported to be developing a 3-nanometer chip to match the most advanced non-Chinese processors as soon as next year, Ren said its best designs still 'lag behind the US by a generation.' A lesson of asymmetric warfare, though, is to exploit your enemy's weaknesses, rather than attempt to match their strengths. That's where rare earths come in. A technological conflict is simply a disguised version of a real flesh-and-blood battle. As Chris Miller's 2022 book Chip War explains, the US advantage in semiconductors was a crucial factor in winning the Cold War. By making processing power incredibly lightweight and error-free, it enabled America to build a far more fearsome military machine. Cruise missiles guided by tiny onboard computers could destroy targets with pinpoint accuracy, rendering them more deadly than Soviet missiles that perennially veered off course. Rare-earth magnets promise to replicate that processing-power revolution in mechanical power — making motors smaller, stronger, cheaper, and more efficient. It's an innovative leap perceptible to anyone who's used a $25 drone: The tiny devices only exist today because of the way this new technology (along with the parallel revolution of lithium-ion batteries ) allows us to move objects in undreamt-of ways. As with cruise missiles in the 1970s, this innovation promises to change the way future wars will be fought. Consider Ukraine's bold drone strike on Russia's long-range bomber fleet earlier this month. Blinded by culture wars over the energy transition, America is doing far too little to close this technological gap. Its military needs for rare-earth magnets, as we've written, have been pretty much met at minimal cost. Compared to the hundreds of billions that China is pouring into chips , the Pentagon has built a rare-earth supply chain since the start of 2020 with $439 million in grants and loans. Worse is the way lithium-ion batteries are falling victim to politics. The looming repeal of Biden era clean-energy subsidies and the resultant collapse of the electric-vehicle supply chain may reduce the output capacity of US battery manufacturers in 2030 by about 75%. That would halt almost every plant not already under construction, and ensure the country can only produce enough cells to power about a fifth of annual car sales. America will be left more dependent on China, both for auto batteries and the host of more crucial niche applications for lithium-ion technology. In the golden age of semiconductors, the US instinctively knew that its strength as a great power lay in its determination to remain at the bleeding edge of innovation. When the might of the state forces technology to submit to ideology, though, the consequences can be disastrous. That's the road the US is heading down, however, in letting China take the lead in rare earths, solar panels, lithium-ion batteries and the other clean electrical technologies of the future. Should American troops find themselves on some future battlefield without the critical minerals and batteries to match the swarms of drones deployed against them, they'll rue the day Washington turned its back on the future.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
an hour ago
- First Post
Iran says Pak vowed nuke-for-nuke if Israel attacks with nuclear weapon, Islamabad refutes
A top Iranian official has claimed that Pakistan would launch a nuclear strike on Israel if it used nuclear weapons against Iran—a claim swiftly denied by Islamabad. The remarks come amid soaring tensions, marked by missile exchanges and escalating rhetoric. read more A senior Iranian official has alleged that Pakistan would retaliate with a nuclear strike against Israel if Tel Aviv were to use nuclear weapons on Iran. The claim was promptly rejected by Islamabad. 'Pakistan has told us that if Israel uses a nuclear bomb on Iran, then Pakistan will also attack Israel with a nuclear bomb,' said General Mohsen Rezaei, a senior IRGC commander and member of Iran's National Security Council, on Iranian state television. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The remarks came amid rising tensions between Iran and Israel, with both sides exchanging missile fire and issuing warnings of further escalation. Pakistan's Defence Minister, however, denied the statement, clarifying that no such assurance had been given. Although Islamabad has rejected any suggestion of nuclear retaliation, it has openly expressed support for Iran in its broader confrontation with Israel. Following the attack on Tehran, Pakistan pledged to 'stand behind Iran' and called on Muslim nations to unite against Israel. On 14 June, Defence Minister Khawaja Asif told the National Assembly that the Muslim world must come together against Israel or risk suffering the same fate as Iran and Palestine. 'Israel has targeted Iran, Yemen, and Palestine. If Muslim nations don't unite now, each will face the same fate,' Asif said. He also urged Muslim countries with diplomatic ties to Israel to sever those relations and called on the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to convene a meeting and formulate a joint strategy against Israel. Israel's policy of nuclear ambiguity Israel maintains a policy of nuclear ambiguity—neither confirming nor denying the possession of nuclear weapons. Nevertheless, it is widely believed to possess a nuclear arsenal, supported by a doctrine focused on deterrence and counter-proliferation to prevent adversaries from acquiring similar capabilities. Iran, by contrast, insists that its nuclear programme is intended solely for peaceful purposes, such as energy production and medical research. As a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), Tehran has repeatedly claimed it does not seek nuclear weapons. However, Western countries and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) have raised concerns over Iran's high-level uranium enrichment, its ballistic missile programme, and its lack of full transparency in nuclear activities—suggesting possible military dimensions. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
