Perfidy, Qur’anic Apostasy or Hermeneutics?

#76, religion when understood as a strictly personal matter leads to atrocities not when it is understood as a public ``humanitarian`` matter. When religion has defaulted its moral and political mooring is when it has been used as a reactionary force by the powers that be for their various ends. When religion is reduced to the realm of the private it becomes merely symbolic and then its symbols are exploited by the powers that be

#78. It was a proxy cold war that the US had been fighting with the soviets in Afghanistan long before the Soviets were lured in there, via Iran and the Shah. The US started its indoctrination campaign at least 5 months before the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. President Carter authorized this direct support (as have various US regimes to the rightists fighting the leftists) and was told by Zbigniew Brzezinski told Carter ````I explained to the president that this support would in my opinion lead to a military intervention by the Soviets.``- you can read his interview here
http://dc.indymedia.org/newswire/display/104868

The US/CIA covert operation there was clearly aimed at indoctrination, that is how they work. The other name associated with this campaign was of Zalmay Khalilzad, the same Neo-Con reactionary who was pushing for war with Iraq. Neither Iraq nor Afghanistan were wars of liberation being supported by the US. You are also forgetting the role of Iran after the US left a power vacuum there. The Masud group was being supported by Iran and the US provided implicit support to the Taliban, even invited a delegation to visit the US for oil/gas talks. The Clinton missile attacks you mention were for home consumption, they had no military significance. They were a joke, more or less.

The ``evil`` regime you mention did no more ``evil`` than the Mujahideen were doing in Afghanistan before they reappeared under the title of ``Taliban``. You point me to a biased source, even back then the US was denying helping the Mujahideen when it clearly was, like the lies that revealed Iran/Contra. You have to look at the socio-political context that gave birth to the Taliban, it is the same context that gave rise to the Afghan ``holy war`` which started long before the soviet invasion, it was the same context that removed Bhutto and brought Zia to power. It stinks of US intervention by fact and proxy.

You are also forgetting that regardless of label (Tiliban or Mujahideen), those people had their origin in the same area and the same camps that fueled the Jihadist atmosphere during the soviet/afghan war. That pipeline was constructed, maintained and radicalized by the US.

masadi #75 I think sir that you need to read a good book (or books) on the Soviet-Afghanistan War and its aftermath. Your are not clear on the facts of the situation by any means.

this may have been before your time, but contrary to your belief that ``Taliban were merely the faction that the US and its indigeneous base in Pakistan, the Pakistan Army supported``, the fact is that no one had heard of the taliban until after the soviets were out in 1989 or so. Far from supporting the taliban, the US at best tolerated the Pakistan support to them in the 1990`s. in the mid-1990`s, the US even launched in fact lauched a missile strike against ben ladin inside taliban-ruled afghanistan. in addition, according to accounts i have read, it is clear that the UK was directly supporting massoud in the 1990`s - who was clearly the leading figure in the struggle against the soviets and later against the taliban. This was while pakistan was supporting the taliban. It is only after the US told pakistan ``you are either with us or against us`` that pakistan finally relinquished its support for this evil regime.

Also, you are not correct when refer to the ``the US indoctrination of the mujahideen``, and indeed unduly belittle the legitimate desire for freedom of the afghan people that feuled this war. Contrary to your understanding that the afghan freedom fighters had started their resistance war in 1979 before the US stepped in in any significant way. They were running into trouble due to soviet use of the Hind helicopter in particular. The US then stepped in in a big way around 1982 to provide the mujahedeen an effective countermeasure to the Hind, namely the Stinger missile, along with massive increases in aid. Read ``Charlie Wilson`s War`` (Charlie Wilson being the congressman who spearheaded the US increased funding for the war, and also rounded up funds from the saudis, as well as weapons from countries around the world - egypt and so forth).

it is OK to have differences of opinions. But not OK to not be aware of basic facts and to form opinions based on hearsay. I suggest you study the history of the Soviet-Afghan war and its aftermath before reaching conclusions, the same way as you have done wrt the Quran.

anil #69 religion is indeed a personal matter between the individual and God. It has been forced into the public sphere by those seeking to earn a living by conducting religious rituals, and (when they get more ambitious) to seek power over society by setting themselves up as the spokesmen for God. The latter has turned religion into a dysfunctional factor in society. That is my view.

#74, the military in Pakistan has always proved to be convenient to the US,- the Taliban were merely the faction that the US and its indigeneous base in Pakistan, the Pakistan Army supported. The CIA/Mujahedeen connection was the rise of the distorted Islam gaining power in the political arena of Afghanistan, so I would blame them.

Religion, be it distorted forms of it, have been used by the political and economic institutions for their various agendas, such was the case behind the US indoctrination of the mujahideen in Afghanistan against the soviets; therein the Taliban had their origin. We see a complete absence of such a phenomenon in the pre-Mujahideen era.

In #74, the second sentence should start ``On #70...``, and not ``On #72...``. sorry.

masadi #73 good points in your responses to posts #68/71/72.

On #72 the facts point in the other direction: i.e. the basic determinants underlying the dysfunctional rule of the taliban were (1) the casting of primitive traditions as ``Islam``, when in fact they are often a violation of the basic teachings of Islam, which of course is a broader problem pervading all muslim societies; and (2) the role of the Pakistan military. The CIA no doubt provided arms throughout the 1980`s - but those arms were to fight the soviet invaders. Once the last soviet soldier had left (1989 I think), the US moved on to far bigger things - namely the breakdown of the soviet empire itself. Guess who stepped into the power vacuum? our own pakistan military, which proceeded to help the taliban (arms, advisers) that helped them take Kabul within a couple of years of the soviet departure.

These facts are important to keep straight, since they point to the great importance of ending the confusion over religion that exists in Pakistan. We will never have a working democracy as long as military interference in politics (i.e. 2 above) as well as ignorance of the peaceful message of Quranic teachings among muslims (i.e. 1 above) exists. Blaming CIA for the above, as for every other problem on earth, is a convenient thing to do - but is a cop out from the real causes of these problems.

#68, the Quran contains God`s message/system for humanity. It does not contain everything for everybody unless it is distorted. The Sura you quote does away with the mullah version of Islam, it is stating very clearly that your ``namaz`` is totally worthless if people`s basic needs are not being met. That my friend is the humanitarian message of the Quran, unsurpassed in either the religious or the secular worlds- expressed in just a few words.

#71, you apparently have no idea about contexulization of the text, so the rest of your rambling is immaterial. Learn what it means first. Religion as a dependent variable has been used and abused by those in command postions of the economic and political domains, it has happened for all religions iincluding Islam. George Bush talks to ``god`` often as well. Contexualization of the text means reading the Quran within the logical boundaries of interpretation that it has defined for itself, which is closely related to the use of words and ideas within the text of the Quran itslef. Unlike Maudoodi and Israr, it does not associate other words with the words of the Quran~ it doesnt accept that baggage that entered Islam under the banner of hadith and fiqh to start with.

#72, pondering, reflection, arguing is a major part of the Quran`s invocations, therefore writing is a big part of Islam, as is reading and reasoning

#70, the Taliban had a context and a cause, that cause can be found more in the CIA and America than in the Quran- I rest my (damn) case.

this guy has gathered so many things in one article and i believe on each thing which he tried to gather......an article can be written.....and in the end he just fluctuate the article rather gathering it.......
and would like to say islam is a religion of practice instead making comments or writing articles....i ain`t saying writing articles on islam or QURRAN either is a bad thing....but i am trying to say practicing islamic values is a good things....this is the big threat for other people around you belong to other religions if you practice exactly what ALLAH has said in QURRAN and hazrat MUHAMMAD SAW has done in his life....but we muslims just make comments....this is why today american soldiers are disgracing islam by putting QURRAN PAK in toilet.....(sorry to say but this is truth,and no one can deny this bitter truth)so in the end i am pleating my post by saying it again islam is the religion of practice......that`s it

Contextualization of the text is indeed the most important ingredient in an `understanding` of the text. Much of `religious scholarship` of the likes of Dr. Israr Ahmeds and Moudidis consist of spreading the political propoganda than praising the almighty...............................all worded in the form of political propagandas to achieve domination over other humans in the guise of spreading brotherhood..............................such contextualization of the texts takes away the agenda of domination over other discourses by espousing certain `immutable discourses` by the likes of Mr. Masadi......................

#66 by Urstruly

[If burner was extinguished by colonization and neo-colonization, then logically it makes sense to remove the effects that caused so.]

How very logical! Even more logical would be your move back to Pakistan, or more specifically the NWFP where your MMA chums are in power.

Being colonized by force is bad enough, but going abroad to get colonized like you have done is worse. I wish proponents of Islamic rule here like you and masadi had the experience of living under the Taliban in Afghanistan and seen first-hand the wonders of an Islamic (Riba-free) economy sans foreign influence.

Re: # 64

Tahmad Sahib:

Is it then correct that you also seem to belive and practice that religious belief belong in the personal space?

Anil Kapuria

Quran is a great book. It being user oriented has every thing for every body - Hadood for the despot and the tyrant; and rituals and terrorism for the Taghooti Mullah. As for common Muslim meaning `Maghloob` like me is Soora Maoon as interpretted hereunder:-


SMALL KINDNESSES ( Soora-e-Maoon, 107)

Have you seen that who belies deen (as it enjoins human welfare)?

That is he who repels the orphan (i.e. indigent).

And urges not the feeding of the needy.

Ah, woe unto worshipers (That is, ‘Musallin’ who call themselves ‘Namazi’)

Who are heedless of the real objective of the Salaat (which they call ‘Namaaz’)

Whose purpose is to make a show of their worship (To impress people with their religiosity)

Yet refuse (obstruct) small kindnesses (selfless human welfare)

#66 great point

Re: # 65

If burner was extinguished by colonization and neo-colonization, then logically it makes sense to remove the effects that caused so. In other words we cannot benefit the social aspect of our religion as long as there is a disconnect between our beliefs and the demand they put on us (socially). If our understanding is correct then this disconnect can only be repaired if not only we break the shackles and chains neo-colonialists but also eliminate the social class among us that has been propped up by them as the custodian of their interests.

#60 & #64 yes, religion (not only what is labelled Islamic) has unfortunately become a joke in today`s world due to the political and moral default of its purported practitioners. Instead of being concerned with the end result of what the Quran desires, a socially conscious, humanitarian, free human being, the believers have become busy with formulas, they have converted means (eg the ritual of prayer) into ends and lost touch with the actual end purpose . In that capacity religion becomes merely a distraction from reality and a total distortion of what actually is Islam according to the Quran.

Kulharee sahib, the burner was deliberately extinguished through generations of colonization, and now neo-colonization where buying F-16s worth billions and howitzers worth tens of millions is more important for pleasing the American masters, than social services and education. IMF/WB requirements dictate much the same.

malikjahanzeb #63 I dont think there is any change in my basic views - i.e. while I have always been very comfortable (and remain comfortable) with my being a muslim, this is based on MY understanding of the message of Islam, NOT the one that I admit is prevalent in the muslim world, is preached in mosques, practiced at homes (e.g. in the form of ``magic emblems`` to ward of evil in the form of ayaats from the Quran), and certainly not the one emphasized by power hungry men. I realize that this view is not what commonly passes for Islam today in any muslim country in the world, and that is fine since I am not interested in convincing anyone to sharing my views (although I am happy to discuss it on chowk, of course).

What you find different is my reference to the practical implications for what is considered to be Islam by most people. And there I agree that it has proved to be a major impediment to progress in Pakistan and the root of many evils.