Democracy, not terror, is the engine of political Islam

Re: # 252

"You say that Hinduism has monotheistic beliefs and name the supreme deity Brahma as a Hindu equivalent of God. If this is so simple, then why people still don’t accept it as monotheism when everyone knows that Hinduism is one of the oldest religions?"

That is because most of the people who believe in the semitic-abrahmic faith cannot accept the possibility monotheism co-existing with idolatory.

"If Vaishnavas don’t confront the outer evil and invade false systems, then the roots are to be found in the pagan belief itself which incites world-weariness in order to achieve spiritual elevation."

Vaishnavas certainly 'confront outer evil' but they do not go about killing those who do not believe in their 'truths'.
They certainly pray to the Lord Vishnu whenever there is invasion from people with evil Asuras or Rakshasa Prakriti (inclinations) who does send in his messenger (doot) or comes to the mortal world as Avatar in order to destroy those evil persons.
There is nothing "world - weariness" about achieving spiritual elevation as per idolator Hindu Shastras because apart from Sanyasa Dharma even through "Karma Yoga" and "Bhakti Yoga" one can live in the world and yet achieve the spiriual heights as a house holder (grihastha).

Re: # 253

Dear Raw Dust,

Would you please explain what you mean with this:

"This is the sacred Heart of Islam, if you will, in other words temporal-Nihilism in the cause of Eternal Goodness of Allah. Nazis had the same logic.

zahid-e-khushk is obligated to not make a moral judgment or else he will be committing Kuf'r/(unbelief in Allah)."

I've the impression that you've missed the previous exchanges between me and Laddu Sahib on this page. May I ask you to go through them?

laddu:
May I interject?
The "Will Of Allah" is insurmountable by human reason alone because Allah is the sole possessor of complete knowledge (Ilm-e-Ludni or some thing like that).

Therefore, it immediately follows that a cruel, immoral act is just one manifestation of Allah since Allah WILLS it. Due to human limitation of not having *cough* Ilm-e-Ludni *cough* and human beings being severely constrained on Time-Axis - human beings cannot causally see the overall GOODNESS in Allah's act. That only Allah CAN see because he has a 100% foresight, unlike humans.

This is the sacred Heart of Islam, if you will, in other words temporal-Nihilism in the cause of Eternal Goodness of Allah. Nazis had the same logic.

zahid-e-khushk is obligated to not make a moral judgment or else he will be committing Kuf'r/(unbelief in Allah). Unbelief in Allah is an unforgivable sin, he knows that. So, the more you drag this argument on the more you effectively drag him onto walk on Pul-e-Siraat (A hair-breadth wide rope stretched over the cauldron of Hell).

Re: # 250, 251

Dear Laddu Sahib,

The history of Aztec conquest by Christian conquistadors and the Aztec welcome of their own hangman based upon their scriptures substantiates that their faith was to be replaced by the Christian one. If that was not God’s plan then what?

World history is witness of Christian and Islamic expansion. They invaded countries and replaced the existing systems with theirs. The only substantial pagan expansion in the history was Hellenism which was but more about self-assertion and hardly about the spreading of the word of their gods. The question is unavoidable, why do the pagan systems lack an innate urge to spread and confront what a monotheist would call evil. The roots of that inactivity must lie in the perception of pagan beliefs.

An explanation could be the pervasiveness of truth in pagan beliefs. The pagan system is defocused because of the pervasive truth where Permatma/Brahma being everything or at least everything aspiring to be merging with him and one can not be in fight with oneself!

A detrimental blow to this focus is caused by a multitude of Brahma’s forms and of course the myriad power sharing gods who are literally worshipped by Hindus. These gods can not be compared with angels in monotheistic theologies where an angel is merely seen as God’s messenger and servant and certainly not as someone who shares power with God. And that’s why we don’t see angels’ idols in churches and mosques.

The monotheistic mind clearly differentiating between God and His creation with no way of any merger between them – leaving aside some Sufi schools of thought as has been explained by Daniel Berk in his article. The perception of one single truth contributes to the significance of that truth which needs to be spread if it is to be saved from the false systems which might engulf the monotheistic truth and that would be Satan’s victory. Whereas a Hindu or Buddhist may have some directions to make their daily lives better (kama, artha, and dharma) that all remains specific to the believer. The big picture misses here which is a fundamental part of the monotheistic beliefs and contributes immensely to the character building of the believer to confront evil. So, it’s not always the lust and greed that drives the monotheistic armies to invade but a completely different world view. That personal lust and greed of the believers give that merely a spurt.

If Vaishnavas don’t confront the outer evil and invade false systems, then the roots are to be found in the pagan belief itself which incites world-weariness in order to achieve spiritual elevation.

You say that Hinduism has monotheistic beliefs and name the supreme deity Brahma as a Hindu equivalent of God. If this is so simple, then why people still don’t accept it as monotheism when everyone knows that Hinduism is one of the oldest religions?

Re: # 249

"ou’re still mixing that innate urge to spread the Word of God with ‘criminal’ actions. "

You are not getting my point of view. What you call as "innate" is to me just a name calling/stereotyping and a "naturalistic fallacy" in order to justify what the victims idolators see as 'criminal' and genocidal actions perpeterated upon them in the name of Islam.

I reiterate that Hinduism have mono-theistic doctrines like in Vaishnaivism or Shaivism whenre the Vishnu or Shiva is like the Allah and rest of the deities are like the Angels subservient to Allah.

Vaishnaivism has the notion of a Baikuntha as well as Naraka ( Jannat and Jahannum) as well as an angel of death and angel (deva) who keeps the account of one's deeds.

But I am yet to see Vaishnavas killing and raping and looting in the present times if others do not accept the 'truths' of Vaishnaivism.

"A marked difference between Hinduism and Buddhism and monotheistic systems is that the former ones are preoccupied with self-abnegating world-weariness in order to achieve spiritual elevation and the latter ones perceive themselves as world-forming and that gives the believer a sense of responsibility toward spreading the Word of God."

Firstly, this notion of Hinduism being self-abnegating is FALSE- Hinduism is concerned with Dharma, Artha, Kama and Moksha in equal proportions and consider the fulfilment of these Chatus Purushartha as an important part of their divine duty.
A Hindu life is divided into 4 Ashramas or 4 . Just as study during Brahmacharya is important, the pursuit of Kama and Artha is equally important.
Remember that hindu idolators have specialized texts in Artha like the Artha Shastra or in Kama like the Kama Sutra. Hindu idolators are required to live their lives to the full within their professional calling enjoying the worldly pleasures.
It is only during the old age and during the Ashrama of sanyassa when people should withdraw and meditate on the formless Brahman in order to attain moksha or dissolution into that formless Brahman.
So, a normal hindu life is a life of 100 years (Shatam Sharada) which is divided into 4 parts and a human being is supposed to live his life to the full and then attain release in the later stages of life.

This impression about self-abnegation as the only defining part of hindu way of life is completely FALSE!!!

Re: # 245 and 246

Dear Laddu and KaalChakra Sahib,

The issue of predestination is present in both Christianity and Islam but Christianity’s believe that God works through history has shaped the Christian thought much more than the Islamic thought which stresses more upon the free will of man.

If we consider the conquest of Aztec kingdom (Mexico) by Spanish general Don Hernando Cortes then the unfolding of God’s plan and working of God through history as believed by Christianity and Islam becomes evident. The Aztec scriptures told them that someday white gods would come from the east across the water. Thus Cortes and his men entered the city, not only as guests, but also as gods coming home -- only to conquest it. So, the question arises what made those Aztec pagans maverick that they greeted their own hangman if not God’s plan?

You’re still mixing that innate urge to spread the Word of God with ‘criminal’ actions. Both Muslims and Christians subjugated the pagan systems, enrich themselves but not seeing in those campaigns that divine mission would be a folly. The theory tells us that one individual might fight in the way of God but still end up in the hell because of his malintentions. But that doesn’t make the self-sacrificing struggle in the name of God something inherently evil.

You’ve raised the issue of Occam’s Razor apparently only to make the Christian and Islamic thought look a ‘simple’ version of the truth which is probably to be found in the highly populous mythology of pagan systems with myriad characters communicating with each other making it a great puzzle to dig out the ‘truth’ from that cacophony. Now the principles of Occam and Fermat urge us to avoid redundancy which is totally contrary to the nature. Since God created this nature, it must be a reflection of how he thinks. As I said earlier, redundancy in a theory doesn’t increase its truth value.

You’ve talked about Kama, Krodha and Moha (greed, lust and anger) which you see in these monotheistic theologies and that according to your view have always been the driving force behind the spreading of the Word of God. But this view can only be maintained if one overlooks, for instance, the early history of Christianity which gives us a totally different picture with apostles travelling tirelessly and everywhere to bring the divine message to the people living with false beliefs – and without a sword! Christians were persecuted for their denial of the pagan beliefs but they remained resolute. Later when they gained power they also used it in order to spread the Word of God and confront the false systems. Muslims were undoubtedly more agile and confrontational in their earliest history than the Christians and that’s because of their concept of the holy war.

Monism and monotheism are quite different. A marked difference between Hinduism and Buddhism and monotheistic systems is that the former ones are preoccupied with self-abnegating world-weariness in order to achieve spiritual elevation and the latter ones perceive themselves as world-forming and that gives the believer a sense of responsibility toward spreading the Word of God.

Re: # 246

I do not think you are given the task of judging who is winning or losing in the arguments!

If you read carefully I am criticizing the justification provided to absolve criminal muslims for committing violence against my hindu pagan fore fathers by saying that "In this sense, those brutal invaders were also doing God’s work and the coming generations would profit from that work".

you do not understand it because you obviously are not a hindu idolator.

May be your most recent exchange with my friend zee (the evil Islamist) and hamidm bhai (the good man) might hint at why you (IMO) went wrong in abandoning ideas in favor of people.

laddu bhai

Zahid is speaking of basic religious ideas, and how they shape behavior. He fully understands that there will always be internal diversity, and that diversity is hardly relevant.

You were speaking of basic religious ideas too, until the fag end of # 245, when you suddenly switched to talking about 'criminal Islamists' and 'criminal Muslims' who are supposedly using the 'mask of Islam'.

I may be wrong but, IMHO, at this point, you have totally lost the debate.

Zahid Saheb,

Islam's Occam razor has been literally USED by muslims in order to let their basic animal instincts of greed, lust and anger ( Kama, Krodha and Moha) take control over themselves and justify their loot, rape and plunders.

There is a huge spiritual literature on Monotheism as well s Absolute Monism within tradition of Vedas (called Upanishads) as well as the folk literature like Kabir , Naath panthis and various ascetic Sadhu Sects within hindu tradition.

I am yet to see them use their monism and monotheism to justify their actions arising out of kaama , krodha and moha. Does that imply that they should also start killing and raping asking every one else to convert to their monotheistic faith?
Can we allow all those Sadhu sects to justify their depravities in the name of "tendencies of MONOTHEISM"??
Can we allow Vedantins to kill , rape and plunder because the rest of the world does not believe in their form of monotheism??
The answer is in negative.

Finally, to say that "In this sense, those brutal invaders were also doing God’s work and the coming generations would profit from that work" is based upon the the false theory of pre-destination that tries to blame God for every criminal act arising out of human depravity

This is evil form of Satanic Fatalism that is used as a mask by criminal Islamists to hide their evil intentions!!

It is time criminal muslims stop using the mask of Islam to hide and absolve themselves of their evil actions.

Re: # 242

Dear Laddu Sahib,

Your protest regarding the brutal conquest of the pagan India by Muslims is understandable. No honest enquirer would determine that the only trouble that these invaders had with the pagan India was India’s paganism and the denial of one God but personal and vested interests to enrich themselves. Certainly they were not in all cases driven solely by some divine call to end the denial of God by Hindus. That personal interest gave spurt to those campaigns. A look at the conquest of the Americas by Christian conquistadors lets us determine the same pattern. So, it substantiates the innate urge of these monotheistic beliefs to spread and subdue the false systems as these religions – driven by their unshakable belief in the oneness of the absolute truth, which is a direct consequence of the belief in the oneness of God -- inherently look disparagingly upon the pagan beliefs which are considered by them as a direct consequence of Satan’s incited waywardness. It wouldn’t be unwise to see in such brutal conquests besides grave sins the unfolding of God’s plan. Through such actions people could get to know the Word of God and eventually accept it. In this sense, those brutal invaders were also doing God’s work and the coming generations would profit from that work as we see that so many people in India and the Americas converted to the monotheistic belief.

You say , “Hindu idolator belief does NOT consider almighty to reveal ONCE to a special person that you call as prophet and then goes to sleep“.

This is the belief of Deism that God made the world like a clockmaker and then left it to run by itself. But this is for the monotheists a mere speculation. A fundamental belief of Monotheism is the belief in the Ruling God! God is not sleeping. He is awake and gives the history a direction which could, however, only be discerned on a greater time scale.

zahid: Monotheism has an innate urge to spread itself and subdue false systems.

laddu: Monotheism has no such innate urge.

What could be behind this dramatic difference? Could we be using the label of "monotheism" for two radically different (may be opposite?!) things?

If you have time and inclination, it might be useful to know what precisely monotheism is - not generally, but very specifically in relation to the rest of your two sesparate religious systems?

This seems like good work.

Re: # 239

"An important point is the limitation of the pagan beliefs to some regions and cultures. Why do such beliefs lack a universal message which is exactly the cause of the innate urge of the monotheistic beliefs to spread their all-encompassing system and subdue the false systems."

There is no 'lack of universal message' in pagan thoughts, the concept of following the golden rule is very much the basis of pagan moral values- no pagan considers stealing as acceptable or killing another pagan as alright or even committing adultery as alright- it is only an old Islamist propaganda that pagans were morally 'inferior' in order to justify their violence against them.
Ther is NOTHING INNATE in a montheistic religions desire!! IT is just a way to justify the fascistic tendencies within Islam that tries to absolve the depravity and criminality of muslims and transfers their culpability to MONTHEISTIC TENDENCIES!! IT is plain nonsense. Muslims commit crime and call it as a result of MONOTHEISM. That is why nirvikalpa and Brahman Sadhana is only prescribed for Sanyasins in hindu idolator thought because immature and greedy Bedouin minds can never undertake the Sadhana of a formless god.

"The concept of the oneness of God in monotheism leads to the unshakable and unwavering belief in the oneness of the truth whereas pagan depiction of one divine Parmatma taking different forms leads to an unnecessary redundancy and unavoidable confusion regarding truth."

There is no confusion. If the entire man kind is a manifestation of one adam and one eve then its million of progrnies as as 'true' as Adam and Eve themselves.
Hindu idolator scripture consider reality in its ultimate form as ONE. The concept of one Brahman as the 'Sat' is enshrined in Hindu idolator thought and is very prominent in the Aranyakas and Upanishad portions of the Vedas. These portion are supposed to be meditated upon by older people and sanyasis or renunciants. Upasana of formless Brahman is the most difficult of all the sadhanas and can easily lead to negationism and destructive tendencies if not done with a sense of 'tyaga' and 'vairagya'.


"That multiplicity of gods and goddesses or Parmatma’s forms makes his system of thought defocused making it certainly awfully difficult to decide which god, goddess or Parmatma’s form -- quite often at loggerheads -- is conveying the right message."

There is no confusion regarding 'message' which is contained in Vedas and Upanishads. These are straight forward message regarding manner of praying to the forces of nature (Surya, Varun, Agni, Prithivi etc.), psychological forces (Rta, Swaha, Swadha etc.) and other metaphysical Deities that control the different realms of metaphysical worlds (Brahma-Vishnu-Mahesha and their female Shaktis).

Hindu idolator belief does NOT consider almighty to reveal ONCE to a special person that you call as prophet and then goes to sleep, rather considers the possibility of direct communication with the divine to be possible for EVERY ONE with sufficient sadhana and faith. Infact, even Lord Shiva could be revealed to Ravana through his sadhana.
Infact , lord krishna revealed to a lot of muslim devotees like Ras Khan. This is very personal form of revelation that makes hindu idolator thought as a very personal, emotional spiritual practice to experience the divine almighty contrary to the set of Islamic propositions that were transcribed in cold logic and precision a thousand of years ago.

zahid and laddu sahibs

Great discussion you have going here. A pleasure to see an actual consideration of different ideas.

Re: # 238

Dear Laddu Sahib,

The redundancy in a theory doesn’t have a bearing effect on the veracity of the theory as also implied by Occam’s Razor. Even if we assume for a moment that both monotheistic and pagan systems convey the same truth whereby merely differing in the form but they still differ in the perception of truth – and of course redundancy. The concept of the oneness of God in monotheism leads to the unshakable and unwavering belief in the oneness of the truth whereas pagan depiction of one divine Parmatma taking different forms leads to an unnecessary redundancy and unavoidable confusion regarding truth. That multiplicity of gods and goddesses or Parmatma’s forms makes his system of thought defocused making it certainly awfully difficult to decide which god, goddess or Parmatma’s form -- quite often at loggerheads -- is conveying the right message.

Fermat told us long ago that light always takes the shortest path between two points. God is perceived in monotheistic theologies as light so why should that light take a detour -- with God revealing himself to His creation through a multitude of gods or goddesses -- reaching the acceptor of that light, the believer? You say, “the 'nirvikalpa' sadhana or praying to formless god is the most difficult sadaana and is only reserved for advanced yogis or older people who have reached the sanyasa asharama stage.� So a monotheistic believer’s worship of an invisible God is to be compared with this advanced stage of pagan worship of Parmatma? Monotheistic theology bridges the gap between God and believer while keeping God invisible whereas the pagan belief despite Parmatma’s symbolic and physical presence as idols in the temples and houses always keeps Parmatma hidden and unreachable requiring spiritual elevation to be able to worship Parmatma directly.

The question still remains why a pagan mind requires the symbolic presence of Parmatma in his temples? And why multitude of gods and goddesses? You seem to be confusing angels with myriad gods and goddesses in the pagan belief which is not true. No monotheist in his right state of mind would start worshipping an angel which is a creation of the same God who created man.

You’ve touched upon the issue of obligatory prayers which might ward off God’s wrath from the believer. I think this system of prayers brings the believer a step closer to his God and gives his life an orientation and discipline. The notion that God is a bookkeeper of the prayers of a believer is rather childish though quite prevalent. But a more mature believer doesn’t restrict his relationship with God to the bare carrying out of some physical prayers. On the contrary he strives to make his whole life a continuous prayer always thinking about what’d be according to God’s will and what’d bring him away from Him.

An important point is the limitation of the pagan beliefs to some regions and cultures. Why do such beliefs lack a universal message which is exactly the cause of the innate urge of the monotheistic beliefs to spread their all-encompassing system and subdue the false systems.

Re: # 237

"With Occam’s Razor, are you implying that the monotheistic thought is merely simpler than the ‘complexer’ pagan philosophies and hence better understandable and acceptable by the common people who don’t have the capacity to understand a much more complex theory of paganism with myriad gods and goddesses frolicking around fulfilling their human-like low wishes transgressing all ethical lines?"

You have hit the nail on the head. Quranic message is supposed to be the simplest of all the messages. It is supposed to be understandable to the unlettered. Mohammad used the occam's razor like Abrahim did- quite literally. But the simplicity of the message does NOT prove its 'truth'. It still remains a matter of faith and its theology of Allah with 8 heavens , countless Angels, djinns, houries, animal and human souls is still a moot point. A pagan's deities and divine entities are as 'true' or 'false' as those of Islam. So, as an idolator I cannot accept that Islamic theology is 'more' true than my own traditional theology.

"The question remains, why, if the pagans believe in some one deity, do they need some idol before them to pray? Why do they need this proximity with their god? That proximity might’ve been a reason for the small radius of thought of paganism which remains a cultural philosophy. A monotheist feels his God with him but the invisible God remains aloof from him and that spiritual search for God in the infinite vast of the universe enhances the radius of his thought at least zillion times and makes his thought and look a universal one contrary to the thought and look of a pagan who remains bound to his cultural limits."

Pagan believes in the manifestations of one divine Parmatma in various forms- the most popular concept of it is in the philosophy of Bheda-abheda or diversity-in-unity.
Regarding 'praying' the God. Pagans do not consider God to be some sort of an evil dictator who needs to be pleased through sycophancy other wise he would torture you.
Pujan is like loving the God and for that the image and murtis of God are used to enhance the emotion of love towards God's various forms. During pujan of idols pagans lovingly call the spiritual mana of deities and express their love like they would do towards a real guest.
There is also a mental part of the visualization called MANAS PUJA through which the deities are prayed and lovingly offered through visualization only.
The entire experience is far fulfilling compared to that of visualizing a formless God.
The 'nirvikalpa' sadhana or praying to formless god is the most difficult sadaana and is only reserved for advanced yogis or older people who have reached the sanyasa asharama stage.

Re: #219, #221

Dear Laddu and Bubba Sahib,

You’ve raised the question, if a forward looking Muslim would “disavow any one of the five pillars of Islam?� A bigger question, however, is why should he do that? Does he feel that the system of prayers which brings him a step closer to his God and gives his life an orientation and a sense of responsibility before his Creator a burden? Does that system of prayers limits his thought in anyway? While he looks for new ways contrary to the backward looking believer who always insists upon reliving history, his will is not to turn his back to his God but to be a vehicle of bringing God’s message to newer times and situations thus spreading God’s message in a more dynamic way leaving the question of how people followed God’s word in the earlier centuries to his backward looking companion.

“Can he de-Arabize Islam?� This is exactly what a forward looking Muslim would do as has been stated by me in my earlier posts. There is a great difference between the timeless and universal Islamic message and its Arabic visage.

There is no point in facing away from Mecca while praying. The reason is certainly not that God lives in Mecca but the symbolism that unifies Muslims of all nations and times in accordance with the spiritual lines ensuring the continuity of history and tradition.

There is no harm in reading the Koran in any other language but the Arabic text ensures authenticity and serves as the reference.

A forward looking Muslim asks whether certain punishments were not more suitable for that specific culture in 7th century and is fundamentally willing to analyze the penal system bringing in the context of modern times and methods to encounter crimes thereby differentiating between crime and sin.

With Occam’s Razor, are you implying that the monotheistic thought is merely simpler than the ‘complexer’ pagan philosophies and hence better understandable and acceptable by the common people who don’t have the capacity to understand a much more complex theory of paganism with myriad gods and goddesses frolicking around fulfilling their human-like low wishes transgressing all ethical lines?

The question remains, why, if the pagans believe in some one deity, do they need some idol before them to pray? Why do they need this proximity with their god? That proximity might’ve been a reason for the small radius of thought of paganism which remains a cultural philosophy. A monotheist feels his God with him but the invisible God remains aloof from him and that spiritual search for God in the infinite vast of the universe enhances the radius of his thought at least zillion times and makes his thought and look a universal one contrary to the thought and look of a pagan who remains bound to his cultural limits.

Re: # 235

tahmed saheb,

The question that criminals amongst Hindus exist is not the moot point.
Criminals exist amongst ALL groups and religions and we all acknowledge that.
If violence against idolators is to be condemned then as a golden rule should be any violence against any other religious group in the name of religion- whosoever 'true' that religion claims itself to be.
There is no doubt about it in the modern world.
But we have to acknowledge the the problem is with these books and religions that need to be reformed. Islam cannot be reformed unless it's hate verses are specifically acknowledged and condemned by the Muslim themselves.
Unless people like you ostracize those Muslims who publicly agree that idolators like me need to be killed and made to pay jizya I cannot see any hope for the Muslims to turn towards moderation.

laddu #232 If you were only condemning Islamic terrorists who attack innocent people in marketplaces, airlines, buses etc., I would be with you. But when you paint all muslims with the same brush that is correctly applied only to terrorists, then you are operating at the same level as those "muslims" who paint all hindus with the same brush.

If you make this distinction between innocent people and criminals in any society, and if you acknowledge that you have criminal among hindus as you do among muslims - then you are not only being fair, you are also winning a lot more people to your side.

Re: # 233

naqshabandi,

you mean to say that muslims prefer to kill than to reform???

you mean that reforms would finish Islam?

I am sorry I cannot see any spirituality in sunnah or your Islam.

laddu

that manifesto by the reformislam group is just your wet dream which will never be fulfilled until every single muslim on this planet is killed. why? because to accept it would be the death of islam itself as it is an attack on the very foundationa principles of islam found in the koran and sunnah.

Re: # 231

tahmed saheb,

there is only a hmmmmmm from you on the pronouncements of violence towards idolators by wolfs like Naqshabandi, Zee and Echo.

See it from an idolator's point of view and as an outsider who has suffered the violence of Islamic Jihadis and Ghazis- not as an insider who thinks that Nashabandi's Islam is more subtle compared to that of Zee's.

For an outsider like me - both are heinous.

hmmmm....hindus whining about muslims, muslims whining about the west. in other words, another usual day on chowk...

http://www.reformislam.org/

OUR GOALS

* to educate Muslims about dangers presented by Islamic religious texts and why Islam must be reformed
* to educate non-Muslims about the differences between moderate Muslims and Islamists (a.k.a. Islamic Religious Fanatics, Radical Muslims, Muslim Fundamentalists, Islamic Extremists or Islamofascists)
* to educate both Muslims and non-Muslims alike that Moderate Muslims are also targets of Islamic Terror



OUR MANIFESTO
Acknowledging mistakes
The majority of the terrorist acts of the last three decades, including the 9/11 attacks, were perpetrated by Islamic fundamentalists in the name of Islam. We, as Muslims, find it abhorrent that Islam is used to murder millions of innocent people, Muslims and non-Muslims alike.

Inconsistencies in the Koran
Unfortunately, Islamic religious texts, including the Koran and the Hadith contain many passages, which call for Islamic domination and incite violence against non-Muslims. It is time to change that. Muslim fundamentalists believe that the Koran is the literal word of Allah. But could Allah, the most Merciful, the most Compassionate, command mass slaughter of people whose only fault is being non-Muslim?

The Koran & the Bible
Many Bible figures from Adam to Jesus (Isa) are considered to be prophets and are respected by Islam. Islamic scholars however believe that both the Old and the New Testament came from God, but that they were corrupted by the Jews and Christians over time. While neither Testament calls for mass murder of unbelievers, the Koran does. Could it be possible that the Koran itself was corrupted by Muslims over the last thirteen centuries?

The need for reform
Islam, in its present form, is not compatible with principles of freedom and democracy. Twenty-first century Muslims have two options: we can continue the barbaric policies of the seventh century perpetuated by Hassan al-Banna, Abdullah Azzam, Yassir Arafat, Ruhollah Khomeini, Osama bin Laden, Muslim Brotherhood, al-Qaeda, Hizballah, Hamas, Hizb-ut-Tahrir, etc., leading to a global war between Dar al-Islam (Islamic World) and Dar al-Harb (non-Islamic World), or we can reform Islam to keep our rich cultural heritage and to cleanse our religion from the reviled relics of the past. We, as Muslims who desire to live in harmony with people of other religions, agnostics, and atheists choose the latter option. We can no longer allow Islamic extremists to use our religion as a weapon. We must protect future generations of Muslims from being brainwashed by the Islamic radicals. If we do not stop the spread of Islamic fundamentalism, our children will become homicidal zombies.

Accepting responsibilities
To start the healing process, we must acknowledge evils done by Muslims in the name of Islam and accept responsibility for those evils. We must remove evil passages from Islamic religious texts, so that future generations of Muslims will not be confused by conflicting messages. Our religious message should be loud and clear: Islam is peace; Islam is love; Islam is light. War, murder, violence, divisiveness & discrimination are not Islamic values.

Religious privacy
Religion is the private matter of every individual. Any person should be able to freely practice any religion as long as the practice does not interfere with the local laws, and no person must be forced to practice any religion. Just as people are created equal, there is no one religion that is superior to another. Any set of beliefs that is spread by force is fundamentally immoral; it is no longer a religion, but a political ideology.

Equality
Islam is one of the many of the world's religions. There will be no Peace and Harmony in the World if Muslims and non-Muslims do not have equal rights. Islamic supremacy doctrine is just as repulsive as Aryan supremacy doctrine. History clearly shows what happens to the society whose members consider themselves above other peoples. All moderate Muslims must repudiate the mere notion of Islamic supremacy.

Sharia
Sharia Law must be abolished, because it is incompatible with norms of modern society.

Outdated practices
Any practices that might have been acceptable in the Seventh Century; i.e., stoning, cutting off body parts, marrying and/or having sex with children or animals, must be condemned by every Muslim.

Outdated verses
The following verses promote divisiveness and religious hatred, bigotry and discrimination. They must be either removed from the Koran or declared outdated and invalid, and marked as such.

Outdated words & phrases
Use of the following words and phrases or their variations must be prohibited during religious services:
• Infidel/Unbeliever: these terms have negative connotation and promote divisiveness and animosity; Islam is not the only religion
• Jihad: this word is often interpreted as Holy War against non-Muslims
• Mujaheed/Holy Warrior: no more wars in the name of Islam
• American (Christian/Crusader/Israeli/Zionist) occupation: these terms promote bigotry; at this point in time, Muslims living in non-Muslim lands have more freedoms than Muslims living in Muslim lands

Islam vs. violence
Islam has no place for violence. Any person calling for an act of violence in the name of Islam must be promptly excommunicated. Any grievances must be addressed by lawful authorities. It is the religious and civic duty of every Muslim to unconditionally condemn any act of terrorism perpetrated in the name of Islam. Any Muslim group that has ties to terrorism in any way, shape, or form, must be universally condemned by both religious and secular Muslims.

Portrayal of Prophets
While portrayal of Prophets is not an acceptable practice in Islam could be personally offensive to some Muslims, other religions do not have such restrictions. Therefore, the portrayal of the Prophets must be treated as a manifestation of free expression.

The Crusades vs. The Inquisition
While the Inquisition was a repulsive practice by Christian Fundamentalists, the Crusades were not unprovoked acts of aggression, but rather attempts to recapture formerly Christian lands controlled by Muslims.

#223 Posted by maffrejal on September 26, 2007 2:08:45 am


Churches/Temples do allow other religion people as long as they follow christian way during that period.


you don't have to follow the "christian way" to attend church...there are a bunch of churches in bombay where you can attend services without any declaration of faith. A lot of hindus go to the mahim church just for the sermons.

My opinion is US/UK has always lived out of developing/poor countries. US/UK cheat developing/poor countries by denying the revenues due to them. This leads to revolt in long term. This behaviour is not unique to any religion or rather its a human trait. When revolt becomes War, people involved in War are blind. So they steriotype and generalise opinions and act on them. Only time can change them.

One can see that developed countries are no different from poor countries when US/UK started puting visa restrictions on Asian immigrants after they realised Asians are making honest (unlike them) money and geting prosperous. This is their way of jihad. The only difference is that they cheat. US/UK have always claimed they are honourable while consistently their behaviour is the opposite.

When Asian countries do the same, this ends up in US/UK starting a war on us. This is a vicious cycle.

"Why kill people if they are of same/different religion?"

It is a matter of DAWAH which is done through the sword- every dispute in Islam is resolved with whosoever wins in bloody war- it is the jungle raj - that is why evey momeen challenges an idolator to make their idols save their lives.

Islam's claim has always depended upon its terror and violence and not any goddam 'truth'.
That is why the threats of Osama are the appreciated by all muslims as the right way to push Islam.

There is one basic element that every religion (including Islam?) agrees. Love of life, Love of nature irrespective of who/what they/it are/is.."Love" is God. Does Islam agree with this? If so, why kill people if they leave Islam? Why kill people if they are of same/different religion?

Re: # 224

if that is true, God of Islam is a monopolist. I guess he is above MRTP Act.

Per the book converting from islam to another religion is death, the final proof of teh islamic belief that there is only one god, the islamic god.

Mosques in India does not allow non-muslims to come into mosque during prayers. Churches/Temples do allow other religion people as long as they follow christian way during that period. So those who are talking about restricting people based on caste etc., have to think about what Islam is doing differently. Untouchability is universal in ALL religion. No Religion does actually allow for discrimination. Its the people who interpret/incite these.

Re: # 221

Even the Jews, Christians, Hindu-Advaitin, Hindu-Vaishnava, Hindu-Dvaitin, Hindu-Shaiva, Hindu-Shakta, Animists and Greek Pagans have this concept of ONE Deity that is considered as the cause of the world. Occam's Razor DOES not imply or prove 'reality' of the one entity that is left after applying it . Infact, this obsession with occam's razor is what causes muslims to behead the idolators and is the root of violence in Islam. An idolator's metaphysical entities are as real or false as Islam's one God and his countless djinns and angels.

The fact remains that the metaphysics of One God essentially carries a hierarachy of other un-provable and false entities like Satan, Jinns, Houries, Angels, 8 heavens , many hells , Angels from hell and countless of the souls.
They are NO more 'real' than the deities like hindu Yama-raj that control and supervise the activities of the metaphysical worlds and its entities inhibiting the nether worlds that are also present in most of the theologies - whether Hindu, Jewish, Chinese or Christian.

To think that the Islamic metaphysical entities are MORE real than the Hindu or Christian nether worlds is plain nonsense and at best a propaganda. To call other's metaphysics as MYTH and Islamic metaphysics as REAL - is plain intellectual hypocrisy that abounds in muslim psyche.

Re: # 206

"Forward looking Muslims don’t disavow God but continue to believe in the oneness of God with all fundamental tenets of Islam. The theological system remains the same."

This is plain rot.

Can you de-Arabinize Islam?
Can you stop reading Quran in Arabic?
Can you stop praying fcing towards mecca and do it towards the statute of liberty?
Can you reject Shariah which is essentially bedoiun culture ?
Can you let women go out without veil and make men wear those shuttlecocks?

This thing about "forward looking muslim" is just a myth- it is at best a taquiyya- it is the rsult of confused thinking of those brought up on a peace loving Mohammad when the reality was completely converse to that!!

I totally disagree that its only Islam that is about oneness of god. It has been inherent in Hindu relegion that there is only ONE god. Since there is only one supreme power, the so called Satan is UNDER this God's control. With that in mind think about the existense of Satan and the intent of God.

Re: # 206

Agreed that forward looking pagans have nothing in common with forward looking muslims or with backward looking muslims.

Refer to post #201: For a rational thinking muslims (an oxymoron?!) using the faculty of his mind can he disavow any one of the five pillars of Islam?

Tahmed #217 {"...I must be writing something true ..."}

Just like the old rooster who continues to crow with all his might because he is convinced that he makes the sun rise. LOL.

echoboom/salimchauhan#211 you are entitled to make up facts. you are also entitled to express them in your own filthy ways.

with jay thakeray (who comes to demonize muslims on chowk), echoboom (who comes to prove he is something on chowk), and salimchauhan( who comes to ridicule whoever he thinks he can get away with - senile old men, females) all fired up...I must be writing something true. Because truth hurts, not lies.

Echo Bhai #215,
The arrogance of Pakistani hypocrites, working against the very interests of Pakistan, is more pernicious than any malicious act by our enemas.

salim:214
What you consider peeing on them, they enjoy it as golden-showers....the damn Perverts!

#213 Echo Bhai,
Without a doubt, I agree with your position regarding the purple paint on the putrid posteriors of the pusillanimous pretenders playing their perfidy against Pakistan.

Salim:211

Thee should never be any let-up or respite in exposing the laal laal orange orange posteriors of the two ChootarRooooons* of CHOWK.

*in their gora-maaster lingo they are called assholes which they always take as a compliment..here it is NOT a compliment..in case the ChootarRooooons start getting ideas.

harish_hyd #203 {"This is what I find most irritating about you. ..at every other place and especially pertaining to Indians and Hindus and even Muslims, you jump in quickly to label them. Perhaps Salim bhai is right about you. "}

Dear Harry,
Believe me, my friend, it was not easy to recognize, identify, and take on this Paki pretender as a genuine, equal opportunity racist bigot. His lack of compassion, his blatant hypocrisy, and his thinly-disguised bias all work in unison to expose him to BOTH Indians and Pakistanis, Hindus and Muslims. The man is the work of the devil - nothing less.

jayp #205 {"Other than calling people names, tahmed has not contributed anything to discussions on chowk. The man has no views on anything, other than condemning people. All his posts are personal attacks on some one or the other."}

Jayp,
Please allow me to disagree with you slightly. This hypocrite has contributed to the further dismantling of Pakistan by fanning the flames of racial bigotry, provincialism, and displaying a thoroughly anti-Mohajir stance. He alone personifies the callous rejection of repatriation for the hundreds of thousands of Pakistanis "stranded" in Bangladesh.

For all his efforts AGAINST the true interests of Pakistan, this senile old hate-monger deserves to have his posterior painted orange.

zahid, thanks! That is a good explanation. Let me see if I can summarize it without distorting it.

Conservative (with its extreme of regressive) vs progressive (with its extreme of lunatic/delusional) may be one of the fundamental operative divides of (wo)mankind.

Since both Muslim conservatives (and regressives) and Muslim progressives (and lunatic/delusional) remain unquestionably Muslim (knowingly or not), the divide enters the otherwise well-knit world of Islam too.

If that is a fair representation, we may consider a tiny wrinkle to build on this view. Given that Islam provides a powerful, all-encompassing worldview toward the creation of an exalted society, the progressive (lunatic/delusional) - conservative (regressive) divide may be unfolding somewhat differently within the world of Islam than in the pagan world. That is, there may be an interactive effect between religious views and group dynamics. (to speculate even further - we may find a little sharpening of the edges).

Paki cricket captain said how he had support of ALL muslims and he expressed regret to ALL muslim that he lost the final... :)...

Even at the highest level, pakis can't think beyond their bedouin-ness... unbelievable...

#205 Jayp - I do once in a while call people "names", typically "liar". But then I substantiate this "name" by pointing to what some lie that he wrote.

As for contributions to chowk, I have contributed a few articles to chowk (all positive in nature), and when exchanging posts with posters interested in issues rather than personal insults, I refrain from that. Those articles are still there for any objective person to readily see, and my thousands of poss are there as well.

So, once again I have caught you lying. Once again I offer you the chance to disprove this, or else remain exposed as a shameless liar.

And talking of having contributed nothing to chowk other than personal insults - show me one article you have contributed to chowk. And tell me honestly if 95% of your posts over the past 10 years on chowk have been anything other than hate-mail about muslims and/or Pakistanis.

harish_hyd: The "countless" threads I have written against stereotyping have to do with Indians painting muslims/Pakistanis as terrorists. Including this one to "bubba" that you find irritating (ignoring the crap writen about muslims by him).

Get your basic facts right, then come talk to me.

Re: # 201

Dear Babbu Sahib,

Contrary to your assimilation between forward looking pagans and Muslims the bridge not only between them and their corresponding backward looking brethren but also between them remains insurmountable. Forward looking Muslims don’t disavow God but continue to believe in the oneness of God with all fundamental tenets of Islam. The theological system remains the same. What differs is their unwillingness to carry with them through the centuries the cultural aspects of Islam’s earliest history which is undoubtedly Arabic and their assertive and critical view of religious thought bringing in the changed realities on the ground which were then unknown to the people and this is in contrast with the backward looking Muslims who remain stuck in a time warp of Islamic earliest history and will not settle unless they’ve restored the circumstances of that phase of humanity in their lives.

Despite these differences, the forward looking Muslims unlike forward looking pagans keep believing in the oneness of God and hence remain alien to each other.

Other than calling people names, tahmed has not contributed anything to discussions on chowk. The man has no views on anything, other than condemning people. All his posts are personal attacks on some one or the other.

Re: # 196

"of course these are the only kind of 'muslims' which are acceptable to our friends like laddu sahib."

Naqshabandi ji,

you are a wolf in sheep's clothing- that is now clear to me. If you had shown even a bit of guts and said "La illahi.." then perhaps I would have thought that your sufism has some depth.
But , you are no different from the Moududi crap followers. and are certainly exposed from your willingness to accept violence towards idolators and payment of Gunda Tax called Jizya by them.
I do not care if Salman Khan or any muslim prays to Lord Ganesha or not - if he does good for him- his vighnas would certainly subside if he has the correct faith.
I am only worried about the the violence that faithfuls like you clearly INTEND to commit against me because I am an idolator who has rejected the message of hate arising out of Quran.
The approval of violence against idolator hindus from so -called sufi followers is even more disturbing because of the false propaganda of 'peace loving' sufism that is eing spread when the reality is completely different.
Sufis like you do not form part of the Gnostic tradition that Martin Ling talks about - you are a slur in the name of Gnostic tradition!!

#202 by tahmed32

This is what I find most irritating about you. On countless other threads, especially anything that pertains to the US and Americans, you wax eloquently about how we should avoid generalizing and stereotyping. Yet at every other place and especially pertaining to Indians and Hindus and even Muslims, you jump in quickly to label them. Perhaps Salim bhai is right about you.

Sri "Bubba" Clinton #201 Alas, if only we muslims were rational and logical like hindus. :-( I understand that the perfectly rational Sri Spock of Star Trekpura fame was a hindu too.

Re: # 200

Good theory, but does not apply to most muslims' thoughts. Rational thoughts have no place in Islamic theology. When it comes to beliefs there is no place for mind, or mind keepers, whether forward looking or backward looking. If you place importance to mind being the sole executioner of Islamic faith then there could be no difference between practicing muslims or the pagans, who are being persecuted.

It appears that those pagans who have forward looking minds would be similar in their beliefs to muslims who have forward looking minds. If this is true, then there is no difference between these two groups of people. Is there?

If the forward looking Islamic mind rejects the five pillars of Islam, does he still remain a muslim?

Re: # 193

Dear KaalChakra,

You’ve raised an important question regarding the discord among Muslims with firm believe in the oneness of God, which not only induces as you’ve also said brotherhood among the believers but requires it. In this discordant picture, however, the overwhelming set of similarities can not be overlooked by an honest enquirer. You’ll hardly find discord about the oneness of God, the tradition of prophethood and its completion by Prophet Muhammed, Quran being the word of God, the responsibility before God, the system of prayers – though here you might find some minor differences in the rituals.

But I think you’ve raised this question in a socio-political context. The notion that Muslims ‘can’t take care of their business’ would have to be reconsidered when applied to earlier Muslim states very progressing in literary and political terms like Spain. Coming back to the present time, it must be accepted, however, that Muslims are in a state of disarray and disorientation with regard to the developments in the world.

In my opinion, we’ll have to distinguish between two mindsets: backward and forward looking who are involved in a tug of war. Whereas the earlier look toward the time when the Prophet lived for their understanding of the problems of the present time thus denying the existence of a clear direction given to the history by God -- which is certainly in the forward direction – and blocking the flow of ideas which results in and caused by an anti-progress state of mind, the latter don’t want to deny the existence and significance of the knowledge that the mankind has accumulated since the passing of the Prophet and see the God-given forward direction to the history and accept it. The backward looking mind in its urge to follow the prophet in order to achieve salvation wants to relive history believing that a step not in line with that of the Prophet would take the believer away from the right path and so would cost him heaven. The forward looking sees the same things but doesn’t forget the context and is able and willing to differentiate between history and the core message of religion which is and must be timeless and cultureless but able to unfold itself in any culture following certain lines. The backward looking mind feels insecure when the historical picture is no more to be seen and strives to create the same and well-acquainted situation where the believer could be certain about the ‘right’ path without the need to fathom out this way in a new situation which increases the odds of ending up in the fangs of Satan who casts doubts. Here you’ll see at least great reservations and in the extreme case an outright rejection of democracy, which is rooted in a negative image of man who could very easily be incited by Satan into erring thus overstepping his role as the slave of God by overwriting God’s will by his own which is to be seen as an affront to God.

The forward looking though no less God-loving and earnest in his search for the ‘right’ path rejects the reliving of the history and relies more on his God-given faculties to find his way in a new situation in a post-Prophet era thereby taking the risk of being abducted by Satan but his trust in God along with the conviction in the forward direction of history helps him overcome his fear. Such a mind believes that everyone possesses partial truth and no one possesses absolute truth. You’ll find here less fear of ideas and more elements of modernity like democracy. This faith in democracy is not only the result of a more positive image of man but also of fear of becoming the slave of some human being playing the vicegerent of God though without possessing the absolute truth.

I hope other friends could add a lot to this.

Re: # 198

Easy - Naqshbandi just needs to strap his suicide belt and blow up the apostate... allah will be very pleased and wil have a special batch of gilmans for him...

Freking bedouins and their stupidity - it never ends... :)

#195 Posted by Naqshbandi on September 24, 2007 2:34:25 pm


clearly said that salman apostated from his religion


apostasy? Doesn't that require you to behead him?

Lets see if you have the guts to carry that out in India..

#195
Do bareilvi see any film which is allowed by the faith.If so which movie does not have a apostate if you mean any non muslim.
Forget about laddui who listen to that lunatic bizerk fools advise

of course these are the only kind of 'muslims' which are acceptable to our friends like laddu sahib.

btw, talking of islam, the noble scholars of bareilly sharif, UP, have issued a fatwa of kufr against salman khan the actor for doing pooja at a ganesha temple and for taking an idol of the elephant-nosed idol home and doing ganpati or whatever. astaghfirullah. rightly, the scholar--and remember bareilly sharif is the headquarters of the sufi-orientated traditional islam of indo-pak--clearly said that salman apostated from his religion and if he wishes to be a muslim he must repent and read the kalimah again.

i am not going to watch that apostate's films again.

#190 SalimChauhan: My conscience is clear. I dont go running around chowk labelling people hypocrites and wishing death upon them because I dont agree with their views on any issue.

Zahid, you are most welcome. Patently, you will add significantly to our store of knowledge. As part of welcome, allow me to place before you a query that came to mind reading # 189. It's not a 'trick question' but something that non-Muslims might ask you.

Muslims, undoubtedly, have a clear universal message and an innate sense of brotherhood. Pagans, as you correctly identified, have to struggle against a patchwork of beliefs, a full rolodex of gods, and no message of any specificed brotherhood.

Yet, Muslims seem to disagree more among themselves (even in such a trivially small world as that of chowk), not only theologically but also about what they should be doing with their own societies, or with those of others.

Liberal and sufi-loving Hindus and even many muslims offer (as you must have found on chowk already) very uncharitable explanations, implying that Muslims (the people, the leaders, or both) inherently can't take care of their business, allowing internal conflict and confusion and external manipulation. This strikes me as possibly wrongheaded.

I will check back tomorrow, and would love to know your views. Thanks.

Hamidumdum2 Sahib,
Sir,
Why have you selected the perpetual role of Mullah Ji Do pyaza for yourself? It's so demoralizing to see you be the straight man for all the Beerbal wannabee horrible hindoos on Chowk, who display their wit easily against you to the detriment of the Oomaa.
Have you ever tried emulating Noor Jahan? :)

Re: # 189

Thanks KaalChakra!

Tahmed #59 {"
You also call me a hypocrite and wish death upon me. And for this you mention the one issue ("Stranded Pakistanis") which you have been using for years on chowk to abuse me without burdening yourself with what my views are on this issue and the reasons for those views.

There is nothing I can do to stop you from this kind of behavior on chowk. But rest assured that I am not intimidated by such bullying. "}

Tahmed Saheb,
Most decent people start off by admitting their mistake and apologizing for their offensive rhetoric. I am not bullying you any more than your own esteemed conscience should be doing. Peace. :)

Zahid # 184 was a particualarly good exposition of a part of Islamic view on monotheism. Zahid, welcome to chowk.

Islam's followers are not insecure as has been unfoundedly suggested here but their religion gives them the greatest innate urge to confront the evil and subdue it.

Though sometimes, a momentary lapse of reason on the part of some juvenile followers results in some unruly behavior inconsistent with the Islamic ethical code but even then that behavior often falls short of the mosques-destroying pogroms of the pagans with no exalted socio-ethical system.

cult: small unpopular religion
religion: large popular cult

islam: cult with the most insecure followers who threaten to behead anyone who says anything about the cult leader..that is, mo..

You are bothered by a nuance in Islamic theology regarding life after death, and not the usual degrading of people of other faith almost always done by muslims, especially the jews.

Pakis choke again!!!!

Go India!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Dear Laddu Sahib and Ranjit Babu,

That attitude which is perceived by many as absolutistic is a natural outcome of the unshakable belief in the oneness of God. Many gods represent prima facie a more ‘democratic’ and ‘open-minded’ picture but a closer look demystifies it as a confusing cacophony. The rest is done by the lack of a big spiritual picture mainly because the frolicking gods and goddesses look more focussed on the fulfilment of their human-like drives rather than educating the human being which could only explain the missing universal message and an exalted socio-ethical system in the pagan beliefs. As I said earlier there is not much room for theological distraction in monotheistic religions in particular about the oneness of God. You make a compromise here and the whole system of thought collapses. So, you can not be a monotheist and puzzled about and wavering in your God’s image at the same time.

#174 Ranjit
"I do not believe in such nonsense. No hindu has lived beyond normal life spans. Anyone who says otherwise is a charlatan".

That is not the point. You and I could dismiss it all we want, as do many other people I am sure. But the fact remains that lots of Hindus believe it; and not only does it not weaken their faith, I am certain that it strengthens it. The phenomenon of abnormal longevity, whether real or imagined, does not adversely affect the faith of a believer.

So you original question is answered; The prolonging of life span, by whatever means, is not going to lead to weaking of faith for muslims.

ranjit
[...its emphasis on equality and egalitarianism of all men...]

Not true. Not for ALL MEN, only Muslim Men... women in islam are not equal... even the "eqaulity" of men itself is subject on a scale of piety...

Islam is nothing but a tribalistic cult system... sure, there are some redeeming features, but it has nothing to do with equality human beings in general...

Re: #180
Dear Laddu Sahib and Ranjit Babu,

You’ve left many parts of my description unmentioned and’ve chosen to focus merely on the Arabic outfit of Islam. Why is this so should be answered by some Tableeghi.
You question the concept of an all-encompassing world view of monotheistic religions and give the predominant Arabic part of Islam as an example. I myself have great reservations about this confusing of the timeless and universal Islamic message with the Arabic culture of a certain time. The unfortunate fact is that not many Muslims share this view and interpret Islam in the context of the events that unfolded themselves in Arabic world. And that’s why I found the article of Daniel Berk very fascinating. I’d urge you to go through his article where he’s explained the evolution of the Islamic thought and has touched the issue that you’ve raised. It’d be a nice idea if Daniel Berk could join us here.

"This makes the fundamental difference between the pagan beliefs which’re no more than cultural philosophies and the monotheistic beliefs with an all-encompassing world view and an innate urge to spread the word of God and subdue the false beliefs."

Dear Zahid Saheb,

How is Islamic monotheism NOT ARABIC CULTURAL IMPERIALISM???
The call for turning every muslim into an arab speaking , mecca facing worshipped is the worst form of cultural imperialism that goes against the propaganda of Islam being some sort of a "universal" spiritual order!!
How is it encompassing 'world view' when it cannot accept any modern thought, modern cultural practice, modern technological innovation or modern political forms?

Why do these guys have to believe in every propaganda that they read about Islam in their Pak studies or those chavanni chaap tafseers.

Re: #176, 177

Dear Sahib and Ranjit Babu,

Unfortunately you're still differentiating between the absolute belief and the oneness of God as the basis of these monotheistic religions. This unshakable belief in the God who is not only The Only One but the Almighty God whose work of ingeniousness is this universe we live in. This is in complete contrast with the patchwork concept of the pagans regarding the creation of this universe. This absoluteness is a direct consequence of the belief in one God and not a personal attitude.

Pagans are usually 'open minded'. The Romans were fed up of their gods and showed intense interest in the exotic religions of the East like the way ungodly people in the West are showing an intense interest in yet another eastern philosophy, Buddhism. But the monotheists with one God at the center of their system of thought have not much room for theological distraction like the pagans who remain mostly in a confused theological state. Their belief centered around the infighting of myriad gods, pretty goddesses and demigods places them before a number of inconsistent views which is quite often interpreted by them as openness. A hallmark of the pagan beliefs is the scope of the world view that limits itself mostly to the personal, cultural and regional level. They miss the universal message and call that ensues from the oneness of the ruling God.

Pundits holding pagan epics whirling around the earth to spread the word of their gods have never been detected but the world history is full of people spreading the word of God through the Bible and the Koran. This makes the fundamental difference between the pagan beliefs which’re no more than cultural philosophies and the monotheistic beliefs with an all-encompassing world view and an innate urge to spread the word of God and subdue the false beliefs.

Re:bubba
"So if violence is taken away from today's muslims, then theologically, in your opinion, Islam has nothing to stand on?"

No, I am not saying that. Islam is a great religion with some superb attributes, especially in its emphasis on equality and egalitarianism of all men. It emphasizes on self-discipline and virtuous living. The fasting at Ramzan is a perfect example at an attempt to moderate people's natural desire to live a hedonistic life. At a social level, it has a exceptionally strong emphasis on social justice. I respect and admire those aspects of Islam.

What I find objectionable is its focus on absoluteness, especially with respect to the afterlife. In my opinion, that fosters intolerance and severe bigotry against other religions. Maybe that was necessary in the early years of Islam in order to ensure the survival of the faith. However, that mindset is anachronistic in the modern age. The day muslims shift away from that absoluteness, we will all see a very positive side of that faith.

Re: # 171

"The exclusion of rationality in the search of God may mislead the searcher to the awkward pagan beliefs where man prefers to fall down before handmade idols -- no matter whether taken as a symbol of some wrathful, benign, or mighty god or demigod -- and beseech."

Dear Muslim Friends,

I find the world of 5 times bowing cult the most "awkward" of all the beliefs.
I find the school master like formless God who is jealous, angry, frightful and always claiming to be the most merciful the most "illogical" of all the laughable beliefs. I consider the Mickey mouse to be a more believable character than the Allah of Islam.
Further , it is only a Rakshasa or a vulgar satanic view that idolators believe that God=idols and hence bow down to idols.
This is a misrepresentation of idolator's religious beliefs that has not been corrected so far by Abrahmic religions and especially Islam.
In fact, Islam insists upon stereotyping and caricatures so that it can motivate it's young ones into brainwashing so that they can embark upon the agenda of hate, extermination of idolators, looting of their lands, rape of their women and enslaving of them as slaves to these faithfuls.
Real Islam is nothing but fascism in disguise of spirituality.

Re:zahid
"Being on the right side of the dividing line does give the believer a sense of strength and conviction. The false beliefs look like weed and Satan's work and hence need to be taken care of. It explains the innate urge and call in these religions to spread and struggle to subdue the false systems representing Satan-incited waywardness."

Again this is the absoluteness in your faith that is speaking. You are so convinced that your religion and ideology is the absolute truth, that you are not willing to concede even for a moment that perhaps afterlife might be completely different from what you imagine it is. Perhaps it may not even exist.

This is why muslims are having such a hard time all over the world. Their absoluteness, almost a deterministic mindset is clashing with that of other people who have a stochastic view of the afterlife. This used to be the strength of muslims in the medieval times when things were settled with swords and spears. In the modern world with nation states and nukes, its a massive weakness. In today's world, it is ideas and thoughts that dominate. That requires people to be sceptical and open minded about everything. Its not because people hate muslims - you are free to believe whatever you wish. Its because people no longer blindly submit to any boolean ideology of true/false statements just because someone said so centuries back. The modern world is all about reasoning.

#174 once medical breakthroughs make it possible to live indefinitely, all those for whom religion is merely a "preparation for the next life" will drop their rituals, since these would no longer be needed to negate their "gunna". However, those for whom religion is what it was meant to be - a code of conduct, individual responsibility, realization of the awesome reality of "existence" in a vast universe - will become even more religious.

Re:viqarm
"If Hindu sages actually living for 500 years hasn't put any damper whatsoever on the faith of the adherents of Hinduism, why do you believe that, in your hypothetical experiment, belief of muslims in Islam will get weakened due to similar longevity?"

I do not believe in such nonsense. No hindu has lived beyond normal life spans. Anyone who says otherwise is a charlatan. If this genuinely happens due to advances in medical science and on a mass scale, it will completely change the role of religion in humanity. Recent articles have suggested that medical science is moving towards accomplishing this feat.

Religion is all about freedom from fear of death. After all why is Islam so potent? Because it guarantees a blissful afterlife if you do A, B and C. Thats why kids are willing to strap on bombs and blow themselves up, since they are convinced that they are quickly achieving that objective. Now imagine if you could get rid of your fear of death right on this planet and in this life. Suddenly you have that same freedom without the need to blow yourself up or blow up other people.

#169 Posted by laddu,

Abey Laddu key bachhey! Why would a dog bite a cockroach ???

Re: # 164 Posted by Ranjit on September 23, 2007 8:59:34 pm

[the absoluteness of Islam is the root cause behind the killings and violence in its name.]

Granted for a moment that this theory is correct. Actually, Islam was promoted through the most violent regimes of its time, just like the Romans. Can you find any Jew who knows his/her history talking highly of the Romans.

So if violence is taken away from today's muslims, then theologically, in your opinion, Islam has nothing to stand on?

Dear pagan friends,

you've been overlooking the foundation of the thought of the religions of Abrahamic traditions in particular Christianity and Islam. You're more used to frolicking gods exploring goddesses but these monotheistic religions've a more serious image of God. Certainly no one has seen God and to believe in this message one is required to have faith thereby including God-given rationality and not excluding it. The exclusion of rationality in the search of God may mislead the searcher to the awkward pagan beliefs where man prefers to fall down before handmade idols -- no matter whether taken as a symbol of some wrathful, benign, or mighty god or demigod -- and beseech.

These religions think if there were many Gods, they'd collide as we see this view testified in the pagan epics!

Being on the right side of the dividing line does give the believer a sense of strength and conviction. The false beliefs look like weed and Satan's work and hence need to be taken care of. It explains the innate urge and call in these religions to spread and struggle to subdue the false systems representing Satan-incited waywardness.

This innate urge to subdue, however, is not to be confused with an innate urge to exterminate as has been mistakenly suggested here by some of you. That'd be overstepping and transgression on part of man, since God could've done that Himself and doesn't require our help in this regard.

#159 Ranjit
"Lets do a thought experiment. Assume that medical science makes advances so that our lifespans are extended to several centuries and we remain healthy throughout. Also assume that there is a good economy and everyone has a good standard of living. How many people would still believe in Islam or any other religion with as much fervor as they do today? When you dont need a daddy to look after you, do you care about his "message" any longer?".

Allow me to respond with something which is not a hypothetical thought experiment. Through some books about Hinduism that I happened to read, I became aware of Hindu sages who have been alive for hundreds of years. The wife of a Romanian friend of mine, devoted to eastern philosophies though not formally a Hindu herself, once vehemently argued with me about a divine who has been living for 500 years, and his disciple keep begging him to "please not die".

For argument's sake, I am not going to dispute such ludicrous claims. I do, however, have a question of you.

If Hindu sages actually living for 500 years hasn't put any damper whatsoever on the faith of the adherents of Hinduism, why do you believe that, in your hypothetical experiment, belief of muslims in Islam will get weakened due to similar longevity?

Re: # 127

"but your obssession with islam tells me that you secretly know it is the truth but you cannot bring yourself to accept it. don't worry, millions of your compatriots already have broken the shackles of butparasti and entered the manly world of butshikani. why don't you too join them?"

I care as much for Islam as I do for that dog on the street.
I am only concerned that the dog on the street should not bite me- I do not mind if it howls all the time some thing for his imaginary dog/god . But I do mind if he is thinking all the time of how to infect me with his dastardly rabies.

Re: # 165

This is BS - God is not an ETERNAL EXAMINER who is trying to torture it's creation in order to make them chant Allahu all the time in eternal sycophancy .

This expression is coming from men who live in eternal FEAR, and not from a man who is at peace with himself and knowns his bearings.

I am completely sure now that your sufism is just a sham to hide the original hate of Islam.

Re: # 125

"hey laddu or paddu or tota raam, whatever your name is, i mistakenly took your queries as those of a former muslim who wished genuinely to know about the islamic legal view on apostates. i now realise from your despicable comments that you are a hater of islam and are a hindu idol-worshipper, polytheist, but-parast, call it whatever you will.

As a but-parast you'd have to pay the jizya--if you were lucky."

There your sufism gets exposed!!! It is evident that your veil of a man in peace with himself is all BS because it has not cleansed your soul of the hatred of original Islam of Mohammad. The fact remains that Sufism has nothing to do with Islam of Mohammad and it is all an artificial marriage of convenience that pagan Gnostics of Arabia and India had adapted in order to flee prosecution from the original Islam of Mohammad. Monotheism and Absolute Monism exists in all religions from Greek paganistic to Hindoo idolator's spiritual practices.
Sufism does not represent original Islam - muslims now use it is at best a taquiyya to fool modern liberal into believing that any spirituality exists in Islam. Ask Echo or Zee if sufism has anything to do with Islam?
You cannot fool idolators into believing that your heart is full of peace when the reality is that you are also itching to slay every idolator who professes his faith and challenges the hatred of Islam against him that is causing war and terrorism in the modern world.
And a man claiming to be a peaceful sufi asks me to pay jizya or Gunda Tax??
Scratch them hard.......and they are all the same!!!

Re:Naqsh
"The whole point of existence in this life is that it is a test to see who will have faith in Allah and who not. If God forced everyone to become a Muslim what would be the point? There would be no test of faith then. God has given MaNKIND and jinns the freedom to belief or not. He has sent His Messengers --culminating with The Prophet--to guide people to Him. If people refuse to believe that is their choice. We makes our choices we gets our rewards/punishment.

On Judgement Day no one can then say-God, you never sent anyone to guide us..."

Naqsh, your posting perfectly highlights my response to Kaal. I respect your right to believe whatever you wish to believe. However, you ought to acknowledge that this is your faith and not a provable certainty. There may be no Allah, no Judgement Day, no rewards, no punishment. In other words, you may be right in all that you believe or you may die and thats the end of everything.

The difference between you and me is that I am open minded about what may happen after death, but you are not. Maybe I will see a God, maybe I will see nothing. Maybe the God turns out to be some dude called Allah who will then punish me for being a hindu, maybe it will be some old guy who is Jesus's dad or maybe it turns out to be one of our 36000 hindu gods. Who knows? Therefore, I do not make any theological sermon as the basis for my identity or let it govern all my actions. Basically I take faith with a grain of salt, while you do not. This is why I will never harm you simply because you believe something else. Your belief in something else has no impact on any afterlife plans that I may or may not have.

My friend Kaal thinks highly about your certainty regarding your afterlife. I dont consider it as a big deal and actually think that it makes you inflexible in dealing with people who think differently from you.

159:

The whole point of existence in this life is that it is a test to see who will have faith in Allah and who not. If God forced everyone to become a Muslim what would be the point? There would be no test of faith then. God has given MaNKIND and jinns the freedom to belief or not. He has sent His Messengers --culminating with The Prophet--to guide people to Him. If people refuse to believe that is their choice. We makes our choices we gets our rewards/punishment.

On Judgement Day no one can then say-God, you never sent anyone to guide us...

Re:bubba
"Is that what bothers you the most? The absoluteness of the theology of Islam, or the killings that is permeated in its name?"

Bubba, the absoluteness of Islam is the root cause behind the killings and violence in its name. Once you believe with absolute certainty that you know the truth and that your eternal bliss is guaranteed based on doing A, B and C, any threat or challenge to your belief is an existential threat. Its a threat against your guarantee of eternal bliss. No wonder you are willing to kill or die for it, since you will get eternal bliss, guaranteed.

Secondly, this absoluteness drives muslims to completely negate other faiths as falsehoods. There are exceptions like the sufis. However, the wahabis tend to take this absoluteness to the extreme, where they believe they are doing God's service by violently eliminating other religions which are falsehoods. Most mainstream muslims will not go to that extreme, but they are certainly intolerant of other faiths. Their intolerance comes not from any personal hatred but from the absoluteness of their belief that theologically they are right.

Consider shia-sunni violence for instance. You see muslim arab sunnis killing muslim arab shias. In other words, just having finer differences in theology is enough to motivate one group to kill the other. Can you imagine shaivites and vaishnavites committing suicide bombings in each other's temples?

So why do sunnis and shias hate each other with such virulence? Its because each group thinks that they have the absolute 100% pure message of Islam as compared to the other. Since their beliefs have differences, obviously both cannot be right simultaneously. Hence in order to validate their absolute belief they need to wage war on the opposing group. While pagans or non-muslims are not viewed as a competition and are simply viewed as possible targets for conversion, an opposing sect of Islam is viewed as an existential threat - a threat to the existence of your absolute ideology, the one on which you are counting on for your eternal bliss.

My friend Kaalchakra, although he is brahmin, is fascinated by that absoluteness in Islam. Once can say that absoluteness is the USP of Islam. The root cause of that blind belief in absoluteness is the basic human insecurity about what will happen after death. You take that out of the equation and most muslims will have no reason to retain their faith, other than simply having an ethical society. However, it is naive and ridiculous to think that Islam's USP is having an ethical society. Its all about the afterlife in Islam.

I would like chowk to explain why this William Dalrymple guy, who does not even bother to show up on his own boards, is being published left, right, and in between whereas chowk's very own Masadi sahib - who has so selflessly been giving us all pieces of his mind on all kinds of boards and eagerly waiting outside the gates, is being so callously ignored - so much so that it would melt the hearts of all decent chowkies faster than butter melts on hot kaDahi?!

Tell me. Why, O why?!!

Re: # 159

Ranjit,

I do not think it is that simple, however longer
one lives and however prosperous one is, this instint
to lord over or dominate or dicatate or to show the
way is there, there will be strife.

bubba: if only we muslims could be saints like hindus. :-(

Re: # 159

[It is that certitude that appeals to ordinary people struggling with day to day life. After all, every one likes to believe that there is an all powerful dadddy (aka God) looking after your interests.]

Is that what bothers you the most? The absoluteness of the theology of Islam, or the killings that is permeated in its name?

Again, what is reprehensible with today's muslims? The killings that is conducted in the name of Islam, or the salemenship and marketing of this theology?

Re:Kaal
Kaal, my basic point is very simple. Lets assume Allah exists and actually sent a message to us via Prophet Muhammad. If Allah is so powerful and monotheistic, why doesnt he simply force everyone to adopt the message and be done with it? After all, he is omnipotent, right? Who the hell are zeemax or naqsh or zahid and why do they need to convince me? Why cant God just do his own job and gather everyone under him within Islam?

The only possibilities are that Allah doesnt care or Allah doesnt exist. In either case, it negates the so called "powerful" message that you are in awe of. Look, I have nothing against anyone using religion as their personal mental crutch. We all hate uncertainty and misfortune. If praying to a God gives us strength to carry on, nothing wrong with it. The problem is that as compared to other religions, Islam almost tries to guarantee each and every thing. It is that certitude that appeals to ordinary people struggling with day to day life. After all, every one likes to believe that there is an all powerful dadddy (aka God) looking after your interests.

Lets do a thought experiment. Assume that medical science makes advances so that our lifespans are extended to several centuries and we remain healthy throughout. Also assume that there is a good economy and everyone has a good standard of living. How many people would still believe in Islam or any other religion with as much fervor as they do today? When you dont need a daddy to look after you, do you care about his "message" any longer?

Re: # 153 raw
[...God never stops by to help me out a bit...]

God is busy building a weed-whacker... the islamists like zhaid_e_worthless have become a big drag on the functioning of this planet - god would have to do something... :)

zhaid_e_bedouin

May be you islmists are the weed and everybody else, pagans included, are the wheat... I am sure God in his infinite wisdom knows you islamists worthless burden on the planet... :)... that's the reason god has invented daisy-cutters...

Kaal

That's fine with me...

but it's not about Ranjit, it's about you... you still have not come out strongly against islamic hate speech, islamic hate against yourself and your kind... what gives?... are you like gandhi? are you willing to sacrifice your own at the altar of the bedouin god?...

Khuda ke banday to hain hazaroN,
banooN main phirtay hain maray maray

-------------

raw, the great poet and philosopher that Iqbal obviously was, he might be referring to Ram here.

------------------------------


shishapa, good to see you either gave up, or accepted it as it is.

I am trying to figure out whether ranjit was seeking/hoping to convince anyone that none of all this might actually be true, and if so, who that target audience amenable to his way of thinking might be.

For that purpose God has created your colleagues!

Yea a lot of mumbo-jumbo. I am working on an optimization problem for work. God never stops by to help me out a bit.

Raw_Dust boss,

Thanks, too complex, I better go back to work on my
feature, kayamat ka din paas aa raha hai, end of the year.

I am going to make an attempt here it's just my take not a bonafide islami take, let's see:

I do not get this. What is the purpose of this exercise?

Answer:
Exercise was done to have the notion of Love in the divine realm and to love is a Godly attribute. Barelvi school believes, the entire exercise was undertaken by God for his Love of the last prophet Mohammad: the most beloved of divine entity ever existed in human form (getting very Jesus here).

In an offhand way, Allama Iqbal tried to take it on this theme like:

Khuda ke banday to hain hazaroN, banooN main phirtay hain maray maray
main banda banoonga uska, jissay Khuda ke bandoan se pyar hoga

actually, Iqbal didn't know how prophetic this shair was - if you take the stress in banooN from 'oo' to 'n' as in Bannu, NWFP. It gets very current.

What was god doing before creating this thing, what is
he/she/it going to do after this thing?

That's an open question.

Is this a one time thing? If so, why?
It might not be one time thing because God exists outside of Time. So, the question is invalid.

Does not god have anything else to do,
Hyperlinked to Sura-e-Ikhlaas here. God is supposedly a mish-mash of many attributes (conflicting at times). In Sura-e-Ikhlaas he reveals his ultimate Indifference to anyone and everyone. God isn't supposed to do anything. He is, imo, first and foremost Indifferent. Divine Indifference is the charge that creates the flux of Fear of God in a muslim.

throwing some
people/souls in hell and some in heaven?

God's given the Devil a challenge to ward off His earthly creations from the Truth(Islam). Devil's gave his word on that one. Poor mortals are like chess pieces in this game between God and Devil. The only difference being the chess game's each and every move is already known by one of the player and both player knows who is going to lose in the end.

Dear shishapa,

Not only this humble person but a spate of theologians have been trying their utmost to decode what's written in God's plan. No one unfortunately knows all details as they've not been revealed to us. But the separation of the weed from the wheat and pagan from the believer is bound to happen. The life of the believer is going to be enviable but not of the pagan.

In other words, god ko kuch kaamdhanda nahi hai kya
siway watching some souls buring in hell and
some souls frolicking in heaven admiring god?
Is this the maksad of god's existence?

Re: # 147

Zahidji,

That is fine. But my question was, why do all of this?
What is the purpose, why now?
What was God doing before starting all of this, and
what is he going to do after it all ends i.e.
separation of weed and wheat happens.

Re: # 146

Dear shishapa,

you could see this in the context of natural selection. We might call this predestination a divine selection. Not everyone bears the right genes -- in theological terms -- resulting in godly or ungodly behavior and hence there's to be a filtering of the weed from the wheat. The weed has to be separated because it doesn't belong to the wheat. So do the pagans with the believers

Re: # 139

I do not get this. What is the purpose of this exercise?
What was god doing before creating this thing, what is
he/she/it going to do after this thing?
Is this a one time thing? If so, why?
Does not god have anything else to do, throwing some
people/souls in hell and some in heaven?

Ajeet, Muslims do not kill others just because others do not believe in 'their delusions.' Islam has a proper methodology for dealing with unbelievers.

------------

mohar11, it might be best if we could learn from ranjit what the puprose of that post was, and other than live-and-let-live - let's celebreate diwali and id - what else he intended to convey.

Most muslims/christian are like little children, believing that santa brings them gifts. Which would be fine if they want to live in their delusions. Only problem is some muslims are ready to kill people who do not believe in their delusions.

Some muslims argue that islam was progressive for its times. However how progressive was it when the lady whom Mohammed married was a business person, while how many women can aspire to do that in the citadels of islam like Saudi Arabia.

Kaal

I don't think that's what Ranjit was saying - anycase, I will defer to him to explain his position...

But right here in your face - islamic hordes are saying that you being pagan must be "subdued"... you being a pagan will be thrown in hell... they are sayig that is the real islam, that is the "uinversal message"...

And yet you, just like is typical of hinud liberals, say nothing... you are accepting and identifying with their bare-knuckle hate speech, which actually directed against you and your kind... and on top of that - you are chiding Ranjit just for pointing out the hate-filled ideology professed by these losers.... you are nuts, I am telling you... :)

Sure you have better personal experience - we all have... I am sure jews had very good persoanl experience with their german friends - that didn't matter, did it?...

mohar11, earlier rajit babu wrote that Bangladeshis are evil people because they are Bangladeshis/Bengalis.

Here he seems to be suggesting that Muslims, in general, lack the juice of basic human intelligence by a few gallons, each. The way he describes them it seems odd that any Muslim is able to leave his bed every morning.

In my personal experience neither of the above is true.

Re: # 138 Naqsh
[...when we die we will see if it is the end or just the real beginning...]

Yep - it will be the real beginning for you... Allah himself will reward you with virgin houris and gilmans... But Ranjit, the pagan, will be thrown in boiling hell... :)

So why wait?... blast your suicide belt in nearest pizza-hit, kill a bunch of pagans/kafirs and go directly to allah right now... get started with the "real beginning" already, right?...

Pakis and their delusions, it never ends... :)

139/zhahid_e_bedouin
[...throw the pagans into the hell...]

Ha ha... These bedouin-wannabe pakis are unbelievable... this is the "universal message" islam taught these islamic losers - that God will throw pagans in hell... ha ha...

And these are the kind of people Kaal is hell-bent on defending... Man, Kaal, you are just f888ing nuts.... :)

"... we all must die" -- only to be resurrected later by God to answer for our earthly life contraray to the pagan belief and to throw the ungodly ones in particular the pagans into the hell.

ranjit you're free to believe in your faith and we are free to believe in ours. when we die we will see if it is the end or just the real beginning. after all, we all must die.

:-)

Kaal

once again,you are proving to be a hinud liberal... right here in your face, bedouins are telling you that they have an "innate urge" to subdue your pagan a**... and yet you continue to defend them and their insane "belief" system...

Like ranjit said - muslims, by and large, have proved to be crazed fanatics... their entire wordlview begins and ends with islam... they even admit it themselves... islam is the complete code for their lives - koran is the book to end all books...

Right here in your face - muslims are throwin racist invectives against pagans and yet you are chiding Ranjit who is right on the money... you, Mr Kaal, are a hinud liberal and hence a complete idiot... :)

Ranjit bhai, for the second time I bring to you unwelcome advice, knowing, I shall be forced, again, to regret this move just as when I cautioned you against launching a torrent of racist invectives against fellow humans. But still...

Ranjit, PLEASE, don't believe that Muslims are all, without exception, complete morons and nitwits, (if not crazed fanatics) who for some reason can't see things 'clear' to you.

You are obviously a very very intelligent man. But your intelligence ends completely and totally where Hinduism ends. And it is not just you. This is the case with all Hindu liberals, on chowk, and elsewhere. I am not making this up. It is true.

Please reconsider your beliefs about all Muslims. These beliefs are astonishingly disrespectful and inexplicably arrogant.

I, for the life of me, can't understand how ANY muslim can put up with a 'friendly' Hindu liberal whose entire mindset is based on utter contempt and hatred for the basics of Islam.

-----------------

Now, of course, I know, will come grave accusations of hidden and monstrous evil intentions on my part. There are none. Yet it's ok if you find them.

Ranjit Babu,

it's no less ridiculous and mind-boggling to see you deny the existence of God and to tell us that death brings the eventual end to life as if you've been dead before.

Regarding your question of why God allowed someone to be pagan please go through my previous posts and those of Naqshbandi Sahib here.

You're complaining about the misionary zeal of Islam. In fact Christianity is equally zealous in spreading the word of God. Both of them have a universal message and socio-ethical system and an innate urge and call to spread till they encompass and subdue other systems in particular the pagan ones.

Ahmed Sahib,

thanks for a nice description of that war and the link.

If I'm not wrong then I see here overall red flags denoting some 'objectional remarks' which might've been made by us? Is it truly depicts the situation or is merely a pagan mischief?

Its hilarious to see muslims go red in the face to prove that monotheism is the next best thing after sliced bread. If there is a God and he hates idolatory, how come there are billions of pagans in the world in the first place? How come they have survived and prospered for millenia? Why do you need to convince me about something that the all powerful God could accomplish in seconds?

At the end of the day, its all our imagination, a collective fantasy. People are scared of death, so they believe in god and religion hoping that something will continue after death. They do no want to accept that death is final, that our neurons will stop firing and it will be all over. People dont realize that after death will be exactly like how it was before birth. Before our birth, we had no consciousness, no knowledge of the zillion things that happened in the universe. Thats the way it will be after death as well as zillion things continue to happen in the future. We cannot accept this harsh and cruel reality and need support from a belief in God, which is manifested in the most extreme manner by muslims in their absolute certainty about an imaginary monotheistic god. They get comfort in that which I understand, but why peddle it as a scientific fact?

You enjoy your Id and let us enjoy our holi/diwali until we can and then we will all push daisies anyway.

zahid #131 This "certain war" is considered most likely to be the war between the persia (under the last pre-Islamic dynasty, the sassanids) and the eastern roman empire, or byzantium (under emperor Heraclius).

The defeat is probably the capture of Antioch (a historic city on the boundary of modern day Turkey and Syria) by the persians. The ultimate victory of the believers (i.e. the eastern roman empire) referred to in the Quran did indeed come about a few years after Surah Rum was added, with the persian emperor Pervaiz Chosroe being overthrown and roman territories in the levant restored.

The Persian-Roman rivalry went back to almost 500 BC, and after the fall of the Italian (or Western) Roman Empire to the barbarians, carried over to the Eastern Roman Empire.

What is interesting about this surah is that it comes out unequivocally on the side of the christians led by Heraclius. Heraclius was of Armenian descent who centuries later were to become bitter enemies of the muslim Ottoman empire. Pre-Islamic persian empires considered pagan in the Quran contributed greatly to both the Roman Empire (particularly in civil engineering techniques as I understand), and also provides roots to the persian Islamic art and literature. The Roman Empire on the other hand had centuries of close ties with North Afria and the Middle East, with one Roman Emperor actually being called Philip the Arab due to his arab descent.

An interesting lesson the Surah provides is with, I think, is that distinctions between the "west" and the "east", between "muslim" and "non-muslim" prove to be extremely superficial and misleading when one considers the complex interrelationships of human interaction throughout history.

For an in-depth look, here is a very good site: http://www.roman-empire.net/articles/article-012.html

That prediction of the defaeat of the persians by the Romans was about a certain war and that's taken place centuries ago. It was certainly not about the eternal subjugation of the Persians by the Romans.

Historically how can this notion be validated that there were naked pagan idol worshippers? How authentic can a muslim writer of history of that era be? All history was burnt to meet the new ruling elite and their new culture.

Actually, the prophet himself predicted and validated the victory of the Romans over the pagan Persians, a point being missed by the Persians these days in their war against the west.

good point zahid-e-khushk sahib about nobility. i suppose our pagan friend laddu sahib would also call it ethical and noble pagan values for five brothers to get married to one girl at the same time and for all 5 of them to make love to her simultaneously?

or let us take the roman empire. it was riddled with orgies, incest between the emperors and their sisters, homosexuality and bisexuality until it became christianised. it is undeniable that the monotheistic religions have much higher ethical and moral standards than the polytheists.

the general conservatism in india today is because of the 1000 years of islamic rule.

Laddu Sahib,

the ethical system of the 'noble pagans' of the time of the 'Kaba-looting' -- as you say -- Islamic Prophet is indeed so 'developed' and 'emancipatory' that the women and men used to worship their idols naked publicly!

Some 'noble pagans' had the unique and enlightening idea of letting their wives sleep with a number of men after each child birth in order to 'purify' them!

Is their anything 'ethical' in the attitude of these pagans -- a direct consequence of their God's understanding and the relevant world view -- that you call noble?

look, no one is forcing you to love islam. if you are happy as an idolworshipping hindu pagan that is fine by me--live and let live. but your obssession with islam tells me that you secretly know it is the truth but you cannot bring yourself to accept it. don't worry, millions of your compatriots already have broken the shackles of butparasti and entered the manly world of butshikani. why don't you too join them?

your dream of muslims hating islam or diluting it to please you and your ilk are just the fantasies of an ignoble ignorant bunch of pagans.

hey laddu or paddu or tota raam, whatever your name is, i mistakenly took your queries as those of a former muslim who wished genuinely to know about the islamic legal view on apostates. i now realise from your despicable comments that you are a hater of islam and are a hindu idol-worshipper, polytheist, but-parast, call it whatever you will.

As a but-parast you'd have to pay the jizya--if you were lucky.
May Allah guide you to the truth of Islam. amen.

Re: # 119

"A fundamental part of the character building teachings of these religions is the concept of struggle -- a Muslim would call it Jihad -- in the way of God and hence confrontation with the ungodly ones who are percieved by them as being at least misled by Satan if not outright God's enemies."

this is the biggest propaganda by Islam.

Every religion has a notion of struggle of God with evil forces and is defined in their own stories and objects of faith.
right from Greek to Parsi to Vedic to Tribal aimistic such stories of struggle abound. I do not understand how is it peculiar to Islam.
The problem is that in the modern world every one has got over these tota-maina stories of jihadic struggle. It is only the muslim who believe in it in the modern times.

Re: # 120

Pointing fingers at others is no answer to absolve the culpability of the murderous intents of a faithful.

The call for my murder is clear on this Pakistani site.

Every hindu idolator must read Quran and Hadith to see what is in store for them.

Re: # 121

I would even say that perhaps Atheists have a better Ethical system than a taquiyya professing mullah who lies at the drop of hat in the name of Islam.

NO Islamic so-called 'superior' Shariah from that pyschic prophet can be match even one millionth of the Judicial Systems of god-forsaken Secular and Un-godly modern nation states.

Re: # 119

"Contrary to that big spiritual picture of Christianity and Islam idolators have a very personal or at the most regional or cultural picture of the Almighty don't posses a universal message or ethical system."

I am sorry to hear that muslims actually believe in the propaganda of mullahs that pagans do not have a "universal message or ethical system" .
This is far from the truth , the pagans even during the days of mohammad were noble and their women were hnourable and powerful.
How can one explain the fact that mohammad was a docile and obedient one-woman husband till the time he was a servant-husband of the powerful pagan woman Khadija.
It is only a propaganda since Islamic days to deride pagans and idolators in order to use this as a political excuse to commit their genocide, rape their women and loot for providing a fifth part to their deity.

Actually many have opined that killing in the name of religion is justified. Can you identify why is it that only the jews/christians/muslims have killed in the name of their religion? The first killings of those non-believers started in the tribal mindset of the semites. Then they went to Africa and grabbed humans and sold them as slaves. After all this is not sanctioned by their religion.

Laddu, if you want to lay blame then the blame rests solely on the jewish dogma of their superiority, and their being chosen people. Like everything else, they have started the concept of hate. Otherwise we would all have sung the praise of Pluto, and his philosophy.

Laddu Sahib,

what troubles religions of Abrahamic tradition with idolatry requires a more serious reflection. You'll have to understand the image of God the sole creator of this universe and man as his creation as seen by these religions. Idolatry is usually percieved by these religions as God's insult and certainly also a great folly on the part of the man himself -- a direct consequence of Satan's incited waywardness.

Christianity and Islam have a universal message of God to believe in and spread. A fundamental part of the character building teachings of these religions is the concept of struggle -- a Muslim would call it Jihad -- in the way of God and hence confrontation with the ungodly ones who are percieved by them as being at least misled by Satan if not outright God's enemies. Both religions've a strong passion about the shaping of the world according to their image of God and understanding of God's message. This incites effort on their part to subjugate the idolators as the God-deniers.

Contrary to that big spiritual picture of Christianity and Islam idolators have a very personal or at the most regional or cultural picture of the Almighty don't posses a universal message or ethical system.

Laddu and others Amartya Sen the Niobel Laurette has written a book The Argumentative Indian...I think you have no employment or day job in Punjab Hain Lol

Re: # 116

Let us not try and find humour in the genocidical intents and murderous expressions that hide in the name of religiosity and spirituality within Islam.

Quran is very clear & forthright in instructing muslims to
beat the shit out of the Paddus.*

After such treatment the colic & cramps in their stomach is gone..that is,if they are not gone, first.

(*as per tafseer of Mulla multiboomboom in his "A Paddus guide to Islam & Muslims")

Re: # 114

To continue with my contention, ALL idolators must read Quran and Hadith if they are to correctly understand the roots of violence wthin political Islam- it is within the Quran and the Hadiths.
finally, unless and until Sufi followers like Naqshabandi try and reject the message of hate within verses of Quran there is no hope for muslims.

"because this behavior permeates in the society at large, and therefore must not be allowed. "

There is NOTHING wrong with idolatory or but-parasti and cannot be equated with any other crime (assuming you consider homosexuality to be a crime as well).

Actually, hatred against idolatory was pushed by Mohammad in order to justify his occupasion and loot of Kabba and other places.
Hatred against kafirs and idolators is the cause of the fascistic push of the political Islam.
That is what dis-proves my contention against the very title of this article -

It is TERROR and HATRED against idolators and kafirs that is the engine of political Islam.

bhai laddu, muslims/christians/jews do have a problem with your "but parastee", because this behavior permeates in the society at large, and therefore must not be allowed. Just like homosexuality these believers want to keep their flock safe from the ills of the society. Due to their physical power they somehow assume the mantle to provide grace to humanity, so killing others is the first order of business. These semitic religions have come about by using force on one another, and when that does not work they go about killing the rest of humanity to their philosophy. So bhai saheb the minions of these group would continue this behavior because their religion is the best tool they have got to completely control humanity.

To say that if idolators say that :

"The Almighty is going to save me = The idol is going to save me"

Is the most stupid and mischievous stereo-typing of and an idolater's faith.

This stereo-typing goes on to expose the blatant mis-representation and propaganda that Islam has been spreading against pagan idolators since ages.

Re: # 107

I do not think why should an idolator in an Islamic state be discriminated against??

I am a human being first.

Does that imply that Islam does not treat al the humans equal?

Re: # 105

Naqshabandi Saheb,

I was not referring to apostacy because I did not profess to Kalima and the muslim faith in the first place. Apostacy is an internal matter of the muslim community.
But I am referring to But-parasti which is an essential part of my religious practice and Dharma.
So, I am referring to kufr of believing in multifarious forms of Adi-Shakti and making multi-farious representations of them in murtis and other iconic representations.

If you believe that your Allah is going to punsih me with hell for that then I am ready to face that hell but not give up my Dharma.

That is alright with me if you just hope that I go to Jahannum and do not actually commit violence against me in THIS world.

Re: # 102

Zee Saheb,

This has been claimed by all the zealots since ages and is based upon blatent mis-representation and stereotyping of idolato's faith.
NO idolator believes that idol/representation = God and hence the idols are going to save them.
This is actually the view of the nastikas or those who do not believe in almighty.
To impute the view that Idols = God is a Rakshasa view of my idolator faith.

DEMOCRAZY- PAKISTAN ESHTYLE

In any democratic country the govt will do anything to get people support, teh so called populist actions. In pakistan, the case is the opposite, the govt is refusing to take action against the hoarders. While the tahmeds are discussing teh religion and democracy, pl do look out and see the reality of pakistan, and it is pathetic .


Cabinet split over wheat crackdown



By Mubarak Zeb Khan


ISLAMABAD, Sept 22: Federal ministers are divided over a proposal to crack down on individuals hoarding wheat as they feel that action against “some influential people� could create problems for the ruling party in the general election.

According to a report submitted by intelligence agencies a few weeks ago, a number of “major players� are stockpiling wheat. But the government is hesitant to attach “top priority� to the scandal because of the election factor.

Sources told Dawn on Saturday a Karachi-based minister stunned the last meeting of the cabinet’s Economic Coordination Committee (ECC), headed by Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz, after he alleged that a textile mill owner had stockpiled 100,000 tons of wheat.

According to the minister, businessmen — owners of textile mills and petrol stations included — having an adequate storage capacity were involved in hoarding the commodity.

The revelation prompted another minister, from Punjab, to advise the government to avoid launching such an operation ‘for the time being’. He said it might ‘upset influential people’, creating ‘problems’ for the government in an election season.

laddu i guess the question you're asking is if an islamic state comes into being in pakistan what will happen to apostates like you who admit their apostasy?

i don't think anything would happen as long as you kept your belief to yourself...

laddu to be blunt, if you've chosen to reject the qur'an then you cannot complain on judgement day when you are led to the hellfire.

laddu

the question of predestination is a subtle one. it is certainly not as you've described it. 'God, in His infinite knowledge already knows what we will do, but His knowing it does not mean that at the time of the action itself we are not free to choice whether to do it or not'.

About your apostasy. I'll let Shaykh Abdul Hakim Murad (formerly Dr. Tim Winter of Cambridge Uni.) speak as he explains it brilliantly:


2. HOW DOES ISLAM DEFINE APOSTASY? IS IT PERMISSIBLE FOR A MUSLIM TO CONVERT TO ANOTHER FAITH? HOW CAN LAWS AGAINST APOSTASY AND BLASPHEMY BE RECONCILED WITH THE KORANIC INJUNCTION OF “NO COMPULSION IN RELIGION�?

Traditional human communities believe that truth leads to salvation, and error to damnation. It is probable that very many religious people in a variety of denominations still believe this. Historically, religiously-faithful princes have therefore seen it as necessary to use the coercive power of the state to forbid apostasy. One of the most powerful and persistent manifestations of this understanding in history was the Inquisition, which was definitively abolished in 1834. Protestant countries also respected this drastic principle; in fact, the first converts to Islam in Britain were impaled on stakes. In a Hindu context, ‘apostasy’ was often classified as violation of caste rules and boundaries, and similarly drastic consequences could follow. After the Mongol sack of Baghdad in 1253, Buddhists who converted to Islam were routinely put to death.

The four canonical schools of Sunni Islamic law, and also most pre-modern Shi’a jurists, recommend similarly drastic penalties, although the judge is enjoined to ‘look for ambiguities’ in order to avert the death penalty wherever possible.

The Ottoman Caliphate, the supreme representative of Sunni Islam, formally abolished this penalty in the aftermath of the so-called Tanzimat reforms launched in 1839. The Shaykh al-Islam, the supreme head of the religious courts and colleges, ratified this major shift in traditional legal doctrine. It was pointed out that there is no verse in the Qur’an that lays down a punishment for apostasy (although chapter 5 verse 54 and chapter 2 verse 217 predict a punishment in the next world). It was also pointed out that the ambiguities in the hadith (the sayings of the Prophet) suggest that apostasy is only an offense when combined with the crime of treason. These ambiguities led some medieval Muslims, long before the advent of modernisation, to reject the majority view. Prominent among them one may name al-Nakha’i (d.713), al-Thawri (d.772), al-Sarakhsi (d. 1090), al-Baji (d. 1081), and al-Sha’rani (d.1565). The debate triggered by the Ottoman reform was continued when al-Azhar University in Cairo, the supreme religious authority in the Arab world, delivered a formal fatwa (religious edict) in 1958, which confirmed the abolition of the classical law in this area.

Among radical Salafis and Wahhabis who do not accept the verdicts of the Ottoman or the Azhar scholars, it is generally believed that the majority medieval view should still be enforced.

The best discussion of the controversy is the book by Mohammed Hashim Kamali, “Freedom of Expression in Islam� (Cambridge, 1997).


Zeemax:
Yes, we do.
:-)

Re: # 95

Mr. Berk is out of his depth. This is a subtle point of islamic theology. The concept is called hadhir wa nadhir. (in urdu hazir nazir -lit. present and witnessing). omnipresence is another english translation but it gives slightly the wrong meaning. to answer the question you asked, we believe that it is POSSIBLE for the Beloved Prophet to be present in a milad gathering but we don't believe that he is always present at every one. Hadhir, as we understand it, means the Prophet has been given the ability by Allah to travel anyway he wishes whenever he wishes; nadhir means that he is witnessing everything going on in the world as if he were looking at it in the palm of his blessed hand.

I hope that answers your question. Do not take your religion from orientalists.

Here is an article by Shaykh Gibril Fouad Haddad -- a Lebanese Sunni on this issue of the Prophet's 'omnipresence' which shows that it is not just a 'Barelvi' belief but the traditional belief of orthodox Sunnis before Sunnism was hijacked by the neokharijites.

http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/misc/hazarnazar.htm

God bless Shaykh Haddad! I love him!

Re: # 101

"hat'd mean that idolators chose to deny God's teachings because of their malintentions or vested interests in the system of idolatory"

Zahid Saheb,

As I said earlier that I have read Quran and have rejected that message , there is nothing wrong in doing so in this modern world. For an idolator like me , there is nothing 'true' about the Islamic metaphysic of winged houries, pshychic prophets and that formless moon god on his throne some where in the eight world. They are as 'false' as the metaphysics arising out out of entities that my son watches on the cartoon network.

Furthr, I think this pre-sumption of my 'mal-intentions" as an idolator is a result of that message of Islam that imputes all sorts of conspiracies and wrong intentions on part of idolators like me.
I do not worry about whether you believe in some god with 1000 names which mean nothing in reality or not ? If that makes you happy , good for you.
I am only worried whether you would start blasting bombs on my head in order to plese your formless god.

#99 Posted by laddu,

Your punishment is an excruciating death by the sword :) Just to prove that your idolatry and your idols will not save you ... :)

Hope that partly answers your question till Naqsh arrives :)

Re: # 99

Laddu Sahib, the doctrine of predestination expalins why're some elected and some not. It's God's will though prima facie looks bizarre that God would create some only to throw them later in the hell. But the history of mankind reinforces this view whichg is usually vehemently denied by Muslims as they believe in the absolute free will of the human being and on the basis of this man's responsibility toward God.

Islam tends to avoid the issue of fate and like in a book of law builts its system of thought on the basis of free will and that'd mean that idolators chose to deny God's teachings because of their malintentions or vested interests in the system of idolatory though they got ample opportunity to learn about Islam as in India where idolators could hardly deny having not seen or known a Muslim

Re: # 99

Naqshabandi Saheb,

This question is with respect to your so called Islamic State or society.

Re: # 94

Hey, Naqshabandi Saheb,

What would be the treatment met out to idoators like me who have already read Quran and rejected the message and consider it to be a message of hate and submission to slavery.

Please tell me if your Allah can ever reveal himself to idolators like me....and if the nur would descend only on sword waving , wiling to die 5 times praying devouts like Zee and Ech??....
tell me , if Allah has made me an idol loving idolator who does not believe in that formless moon deity, why did he choose me for sealng my heart only??

Naqshbandi,

Well ... at-least we agree on the Islamic revolution. That's some progress. We can agree on the modus operandi later ... :)

#85 Posted by rf786,

Good point. However Rasheed Ghazi was not a militant, but merely an agitator. He had tried till the very last to prevent the disaster which he knew would follow if a storming took place, but failed, and then said go to hell. In the aftermath it is clear he was sincere and knew exactly what would follow.

Naqsh, admittedly that was VERY unfair to you. You are a true believer; your sufism comes AFTER you express full and complete faith in traditional Islam. Never heard you confuse anything else for Islam, and vice versa. Nor are you actively trying to fool anyone.

You genuinely have a different, and respectable, appraoch. That's all. I take those words back enitirely. Sorry, bro.

Thanks Naqshbandi Sahib,

that was very enlightening. You bear out what Daniel Berk has described in a more detailed way regarding Brelvi theology's position toward the Prophet.

Do you also believe as Daniel Berk has stated in the presence of the Prophet during a Melad ceremony?

Re: # 92

kaal,

bhai i respect your interactions on chowk but here you are talking of something you have no knowledge of, or, insufficient knowledge.
:-)(

Mr. Dry Ascetic Sahib!

I am indeed a Sunni-Hanafi Barelvi and thus follow the orthodox Maturidi creed of Ahlus Sunnah w'al Jama'ah.

Thus my core beliefs are the same of those "Traditionalist" Muslims everywhere: a devotional love of Allah, and especially, of His Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam.

As a Sunni-Barelvi scholar said: "Islam ishq e Nabi ka doosra naam hai!"

If a Hindu, clearly wrong-headed; if a Muslim, clearly ridiculous. Only a good political unit, a water carrier, a place holder, for political Islam.

Naqshbandi, your name suggests a leaning toward the Brelvi thought and your self-description of a devotional relation toward Islam is in line with that.

If I may ask, what're your core beliefs that make the foundation of this devotional relationship with Islam?

Naqshbandi: U are a Prophet and Allah loving Hindu, Zeemax is a Muslim. :)

i think i have finally nailed the difference between my idea of an islamic state and zeemax's: my islam is devotional first, political afterwards. zeemax's is purely political.

Muslims worship Allah. Islamists worship Islam. :-)

blowing up the bamiyaan buddha's wsn't exactly the taliban's finest hour was it?

to paraphrase bruce lee from enter the dragon: 'stones don't hit back.'

zee:
'poverty is my pride' [man faqru fakhri (?)]-- sacred hadith saying of our holy prophet muhammad sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam. this 'faqr' means not being attached to material things. if you have it alhamdulillah, if you don't alhamdulillah.

zeemax,
i don't actually get your 'warning' in your last post but any one who wants to--even in jest--blow up the blessed shrine of hazrat data ali hijwiri ganj bakhsh is an enemy of mine. if THAT is the kind of thing your brand of islamists wish to do then i pray they never come into power. and if it is between these types of islamists and musharraf i support musharraf.

a genuine islamic revolution on the other hand...notice islamic not salafite--would be a panacea for pakistan's woes.

shaykh abdul hakim murad--formerly dr. t j winter of cambridge university--a real scholar (not the wahabi type) has said that 'we have a shia state (iran), we have a wahabi state [saudi arabia] but we don't have a sunni state.'

Re: # 83

And Rasheed Ghazi.

Re: # 80

Naqshbandi suggests that "the peasants/working classes are already completely islamicised".

I suspect this equating premodern lifestyle and mindset with a timeless and universal Islamic message unaware of any cultural boundries. What can be said about the peasant/working class is that they're still behind on the time axis.

I suggest you go through the detailed analysis of this problem of confusing the Islamic way of life and merely a primitive culture in the wonderful article of Daniel Berk.

#81 Posted by hamidm2,

When Nek Mohammad was killed, it was supposed to be a great victory against 'terror'. When Zarqawi, ditto. Then Mulla Dadullah, same same. Then Abdullah Mehsood, no different. Now you want Bait-ullah Mehsud? Be my guest. :)

Actually Dorcheter is a good idea. They have nice high-tea there. You see, Jihadis don't HAVE to be in caves ! After all the cars they chose to blow up Covent Garden were all Mercedes :)

#80 Posted by Naqshbandi,

Don't even consider it. Not only will you lose, but you will worsen things enough to see Data Darbar being blown up just as Taiban blew up the Bamyan Budha :)

zeemax,

somewhere there is a hellfire missile with baitullah mehsud's name written on it ........ i would advise you from visiting any caves on your next visit to pakistan - you can hold your cell's meeting at the dorchester in london where your slk will be safe ......

zeemax,
thanks for your answers...:-)
but the 'elite' [kanjaroons] will fight tooth and nail to prevent the rise of a genuinely popular islamic movement; the peasants/working classes are already completely islamicised, and the middle class is becoming so. once the popularity for an islamic movement hits the middle classes in earnest then no force will stop it.

#78 Posted by hamidm2,

Islam does not celebrate poverty, nor does it abhor riches.

And what makes you think I'm not fighting for the cause as well? :)

Re: # 75

zeemax,

.... what can be more 'elitist' than posting a picture of your burgundy mercedes slk while your impoverished iman crazed compatriots were holed up in the mosque fighting for your cause ?.... shame on you !

#76 Posted by zahid_e_khushk,

There's a technical point here. The case's plea is to decide on the legality of the uniform, which is quite legal. However if the case had challenged the 17th amendment ITSELF as being against the 'spirit' of the 1973 constitution, it would be a different story. But of-course Qazi couldn't do that because he was in the forefront of making that amendment in the first place.

I suspect if the 17th amendment had been challenged, the CJ would have sat on the bench and then it would certainly have been a full bench of the SC. As it is, this case is just petty and the SC remarks indicate the court thinks so too.

That the Chief Justice (CJ) of the Supreme Court (SC) denied to hear the case against Musharraf who's done utmost to illegally oust the CJ on the grounds of the possible involvement of his personal feelings against his enemy -- or at least to rule out the perception of the observers -- looks prima facie a moral act.

A closer look, however, brings the severity of the situation to light and this is the incapability of the CJ -- no matter how moral his reasoning is -- to rule in probably the most important case of the recent history of Pakistan. It simply means that in such an important time of testing Pakistan has no CJ! And because of his fear of being seen as partial the full bench of SC can't hear the case.

Barring some die-hard supporters of Musharraf like the MQM riffraff most sane people would consider his opinion from the legal perspective and not from that of the ruling junta.

... missed this:

The sort of Islam advocated by al-Qaeda and the Lal Mosque crew is not so popular with most pakistanis.

Due to the reason that the Lal Mosque movement was for mainly social reasons, it does have enough support where it matters. Of-course, it would not have any support in the intelligentsia or the liberal elite, but they do not matter.

#69 Posted by Naqshbandi,

The sort of Islam the Lal Masjid crew was agitating for was in fact a lot milder than what you have in Saudia, or even Iran.

Besides, where people make the usual mistake is that the Lal Msajid movement was mainly social, and not theocratic. There was a lot of disinformation of-course about forced CD burnings and threats of acid throwing etc which are all false.

Re: # 65

Pee Max,

Probably the best post on this board but not good enough for your faux pas on Behtullah Meshud.

#69,

The islamic ideas have nothing to do with public support. Only 100 Km from islamabad, the barber shops ahve closed down and they no more shave beards, and barbers doing that will be killed.

The jihadis are at the door step, wake up the elites of pakistan.

Al quada army of pakistan.

Army men refusing to fight the tribals, what next, hand over the bomb.

from jang of today, editorial
/////////////////////////////////
Bin Laden said that it was "obligatory" on every "follower" to fight President Musharraf and the Pakistan Army and anyone who helps them. By doing so, he is in all probability sending a message to his followers to continue their attacks against the Pakistani armed forces and is also trying to create divisions within their rank and file.

There have been reports --though denied by ISPR -- of misgivings among at least some paramilitary units, including one this week which said that six soldiers posted in the area where 15 FC personnel were abducted and later killed by militants refused to carry out orders and left their posts.

The military's response to these threats is reassuring but also expected. Its constitutional duty is to guard against external and internal threats and fighting militants, extremists and their sympathizers is something that should concern it. The only problem -- and it isn't a small one -- is that many ordinary people do not have a necessarily negative view of Osama Bin Laden. After all, this is not based on anecdotal evidence but has been confirmed and re-confirmed in several surveys taken over the past few years. The most recent one was conducted by a US-based think-tank in August and in it 46 per cent of the sample of Pakistanis polled had a favourable view of Bin Laden, compared to 38 per cent who thought the same for President Musharraf.

Re: # 24 Posted by HP on September 21, 2007 8:23:51 am

You have identified the strategy that tinpot dictators/politicians in countries such as Pakistan, have always used.

[The purpose was to stave off the US pressure from the Army regime in Pakistan. A tactics they may still use, if the situation begins to get out of hand.]

Due to their own mis-management these people blame the US and drum up street protests. Then of course, we have comments from people like masadi.

Re: # 64

So Zeemax,
How then will we get this Islamic revolution? The sort of Islam advocated by al-Qaeda and the Lal Mosque crew is not so popular with most pakistanis.

Re: # 64

So Zeemax,
How then will we get this Islamic revolution? The sort of Islam advocated by al-Qaeda and the Lal Mosque crew is not so popular with most pakistanis.

zeemax #62 That is the best description I have read so far on the dilemma Pakistanis are faced with today, so thanks for taking the time to spell it out. And this is indeed a critical time in Pakistan's history when things could swing in any direction. All we (i.e. Pakistanis not actively engaged in the crisis) can do at this stage is hope and pray for a return to democracy and the rule of law without bloodshed. One can only speculate though on where Pakistan will be an year from now, or five years from now. This is the "gift" that military rule has given Pakistan!!

One thing is clear - the Chief Justice proved more damaging to Musharraf's rule outside office than he can perhaps be (for reasons you provide) inside office. That is one ray of hope I see - since he is the only national level figure today in Pakistan who commands respect from the vast majority of the population and whom Musharraf and co. dare not openly confront anymore, and behind whom a good number of the petty politicians (religious and mainstream) are happy to line up.

Negotiated democrazy,

So many pakistanis are hopeful of a bright future after the return of banazir, but the fact is that there will be negotiations with the mullahs and the islamic party also will be part of teh power sharing deal.

Now the jihadis have demonstrated their military and political strenghts and seeing the mass surrenders of teh troops, it is definite that the army will include them as part of any political chage.

#62 Posted by tahmed32,

Let's examine what the CJ movement did and what it cannot do.

The newly independent CJ, and perhaps the superior judiciary CAN do, is to interpret the constitution in its letter and spirit - and NOT as to the moral aspects of any amendments brought into it by the Parliament. Are we clear so far?

Now, the dilemma of the SC is over the Qazi Hussain petition and the 17th amendment. The 17th amendment, lawfully brought by a 2/3rd majority of the parliament, states that firstly the 'President' is indeed a legitimate 'President'; Secondly the 'President' can hold two offices till end December 2007; and Thirdly that the presidential elections can be held two months BEFORE the term of the parliament expires. (It used to be AFTER but was substituted in the LFO which was made integral by 17th amendment)

Now what does all the above mean? It means the President CAN be elected IN uniform BY a simple majority of an assembly for FIVE years which itself only has two months to live.

This is morally repugnant, but perfectly legal.

In the above case, what can the SC do? It's not there to rule on the 'morality' of amendments, but merely their interpretation. So the SC verdict is a foregone conclusion.

The people who broke the morality are the parliamentarians.

Above is why your optimism over the freedom of the courts and democracy in the free and fair elections is completely misplaced. None of the above can deliver 'justice'.

#61 Posted by Naqshbandi.

1) I don't see a civil war ala Iraq at all. There's no sectarian divide in Pakistan. Iraq's situation is that there's an ethnic cleansing of Sunnis going on by the occupying forces and their collaborators i.e. some factions of Shias who're in Government. Baghdad has already been ethnically cleansed, and now the attempt is on the entire central Iraq. There's no parallel.

2) Islamic parties reality is what I stated in the post below. So one can discount them without any further ado.

3) Leadership exists, except that it is non-political so you seldom hear about them.

4) An Islamic General? But surprisingly they only become Islamic and join the Tableeghi party after having retired. But yes that's a possibility. I just don't think any exist anymore. All were purged after the Javed Nasir and Hameed Gul episodes.

#60 Zeemax
"These are all 'Sarkari Mullahs'. Latest evidence is Falur-Rahman's distancing from the resignations by APDM after having agreed in the London APC".

Isn't it sickening? No wonder ordinary muslims get pissed off. With champions of faith like our maulana diesel, who needs opportunists?

"matA'e dIn-o-dAnish luT ga'I Allah vAloN kI
yeh kis kAfir adA kA ghamza'E KhUNrEz hae sAQI"

zeemax #58 No one considers the popular resistance in Pakistan to Musharraf's attempts at stepping over the basic rights of Pakistanis to be "extremism" when itis expressed as peaceful demonstrations against Musharraf's attempts at perpetuating his military dictatorship in Pakistan, and when it is expressed by the courageous stand of the Chief Justice.

Such resistance has won respect and recognition of the Pakistani people (led primarily by lawyers and journalists), and no one would label it extremism. This resistance has proved effective, forcing an arrogant dictator to go running to dubai attempting to strike "deals" with Bhutto, forcing the world to take notice of the Pakistani people, and causing even Bush to fall in line and echo the CJ's call for free and fair elections.

What is considered "extremism" normally is not the above. It is something quite different - it is attacks on innocent people in buses, planes, marketplaces.

Hope this clarifies. :-)

zeemax,
isn't the problem with that though that we will have civil war a la iraq and that it will be the ordinary man and woman who will suffer?

then again, other than revolution what is the alternative for real change? i suppose the islami parties could come in to power via the ballot box but it is inevitable that these elections will be massively rigged so that mushy's party wins.

problem is--where is the Charismatic Mainstream Muslim Leader to lead the Inqilaab? In Iran, the majority of Iranians were Shias and so could accept Khomweini as Rahbar e Azam. In Pakistan the majority Muslim population (Sunni Barelvi) does not, as yet, have a political religious figure whom everyone can unite behind.

An army-led coup which puts an islamic general in charge? This might actually be the best chance.

To expand on the following statement in the previous post:

... there are enough turncoats and opportunists in every political party's ranks...

This is where Dalrymple is wrong when he mentions the Islamo-political parties in Pakistan i.e. MMA. These are all 'Sarkari Mullahs'. Latest evidence is Falur-Rahman's distancing from the resignations by APDM after having agreed in the London APC. Even though resignations mean nothing other than depriving the presidential elections of some legitimacy, these would have led the way for the ONLY way to prevent musharraf's election i.e. in dissolution of the NWFP assembly. It is obvious this is not going to happen now, and musharraf will be duly elected by the SAME assemblies on 6 October and his ugly face will be on show for another 5 years, with BB as PM, the w.o.t will continue on track, and the bombs will continue to go off in increasing numbers.

Besides, the very same Qazi Hussain, who is complaining now about the SC's remarks, was the same person who gleefully ushered in the 17th amendment in exchange for power in two provinces.

So, Bait-Ullah Mehsud Zindabad !

SalimChauhan: You are entitled to consider what I write to be (to use your epithets) nonsensical, flatulent. You dont burden yourself with identifying what I wrote that you are commenting on, let alone provide the reason why you consider it nonsensical and flatulent. This makes it impossible for me to determine what it is that you consider "nonsensical and flatulent" and to thus improve myself.

You also call me a hypocrite and wish death upon me. And for this you mention the one issue ("Stranded Pakistanis") which you have been using for years on chowk to abuse me without burdening yourself with what my views are on this issue and the reasons for those views.

There is nothing I can do to stop you from this kind of behavior on chowk. But rest assured that I am not intimidated by such bullying.

#57 Posted by viqarm,

But for extremism, mankind would not have know freedom.

This is true. As it stands, you see one man ... just one man, holding the entire Pakistan nation by the scruff of its neck and thrashing it about here and there, and having a jolly good time doing it. And with what? With the backing of the military which is not only fed and clothed but also housed in luxury by the direct and indirect taxes of the very same poor people whom they're trampling under their boots.

So what do you do? Go the courts? Wrong. Courts can only do so much because they have their future to worry about. They can all be sent packing if the 'man' really decides to go the limit. Demonstrate in the street? Maybe but there are enough turncoats and opportunists in every political party's ranks to sabotage any mass movement. Suffer silently? Yes that's the best course for the ordinary harry particularly when it is mitigated with some petty handouts in the form of atta and/or sugar subsidies. Alla Alla Khair Salla!

But there's another way. Blow up the status-quo alongwith those who perpetuate it to kingdom come with bombs and bullets and guillotines, and start again with a new system which guarantees egalitarianism and justice, and cruel punishments for those who attempt to subvert it.

That's the only way, and it is gladly observed that it is being satisfactorily furthered.

All these concocted terms like "extremism", and "political Islam" is meaningless jargon that keeps terrorism experts and analyst employed. Ordinary experience - if only the eyes are not deliberately "widely shut" - shows that just about anyone of us can be cornered into being a "so called" extremist.

Two simple examples from the TV show "Live with Talat" yesterday:

"We will surround the election commission building, we will break in and enter, and we will tear up the papers. Let him, who can, stop us ...".

These words were not uttered by a lunatic, but by a very senior ** lawyer ** of the supreme court of Pakistan, who was on the panel.

From another panelist:

"There is no rational answer to aave hi aave. If you push my back against the wall, there are only two possibilites. I will either be at your feet, or against your throat".

When will people wake up and realize that anyone denied all legal/ethical recourse is bound to take extreme steps, rich or poor, educated or illetrate, secular or religious, fascist or democrat. It does not make any difference.

But for extremism, mankind would not have know freedom.

"The usual US response has been to retreat from its push for democracy when the "wrong" parties win. This was the case not just with the electoral victory of Hamas, but also in Egypt"

That ** was ** the case in Egypt and Palestine; but I am surprised the author has chosen to ignore what is happening ** right now **, in broad daylight, in Pakistan. A dream set up of convenience is being contrived to be put in place, in the near certain hope that it will solve all problems of the West in that region of the world. Somehow - I don't know how - even the recently rejuvenated supreme court seems to have been successfully subverted.

All this, in no way, guarantees that the nightmare is over; it may yet be upon us, the hapless bystanders ...

#21 GT
"But the question is: will the violence go much further? This indeed is a terrifying question and one simply cannot sit back and wait and watch till it happens".

More importantly, will the violence solve anything? The only prediction that can be safely made is that there will be unimaginable devastation and a lot of blood on the floor everywhere.

The terrifying feeling one has is that of a person in the middle of a highway, tied to a rock, mouth gagged, eyes fixed at the headlights of the oncoming truck still at a distance.

He can't free himself, cannot move, and cannot scream ...

Re: # 52

And Clitfon would then move further west because he would not want to be stained with malodorous sweepers of indian origin.

But then he would find himself with the sweet smelling camel and the sheikh

regards

Re: # 48
So Clif, you must be a punjabi ?

regards

ok, so the Mullahs kills the Liberaloon Pakistanis who wanted Pakistan - That is the first step.

Then the Mullahs (who are actually pro-Gandhi and Hindu Muslim togetherness - as per Manto) come to Power in Pak.

Then, Pakistan and India reunite - as the Mullahs and Gandhi wanted.

Then Osma Bin Laden becomes Khalifa / Grand Mughal of India - no biggie, we Hindus also lived under Aurangzeb.

So Muslims have to live under Islam rule but Hindus are exempt as Dhimmis.

Then Osama the Arab is killed by some local Muslim - kinda repeat of slave dynasty / Mughal succession wars.

Then Muslims kills each other - Sunni Hanafi against Wahabbi against Shia etc. Hindus continue living as Dhimmis. Local Muslims look on enviously as Hindus drink alcohol, have entertainment whereas Muslims are forced to live by Sunnah.

Ultimately, the Islamic Caliphate is reduced to Red Fort area of Delhi. Descendants of Islamic Shaikh Bin Laden and others become degenrate drunk whoremongers.

Life carried on for Hindus as before.

Could it be inferred that right now democracy would turn the wheel of history backwards because of the backward looking 'demos' still dreaming of the old saintly times, confusing the currently unattainable social justice and good governance with the personal just acts of great religious personalities centuries ago thus letting themselves led by the wish to relive history.

lol...oh the irony!!! the identity of india and pakistan alright !!!(paki heavy)

Clifton:

And this is an article on demo crazy? ...huh..

:)
GT
unclear from his posts ...if there had been another participant as stinky we could have generalized :)

"Is he inevitable for a senseful discussion?"

Should only the 'senseful' participate in a discussion?

Clifon,

The mal-odor comes from the Indian origin or toilet sweeping (thinking ikaan).

khuda ka khauf karo gialay 420

Dear Clif,

I hope you are not one of them

regards

Is he inevitable for a senseful discussion?

dear chowk staff please reinstate arjun ASAP. Being daily reminded of how hateful some mal-odorous toilet sweepers of Indian origin are maybe unpleasant ...but it is also reality testing.

#41 Posted by giani_240:

"Does it mean that if I do not like your post I can filter it out ?"

No, because you are not the chosen one :-)

I have this feeling in my gut that arjun's post was hastily removed and the person who did so is now repenting a bit.

No more on the subject.

Re: # 40

I thought that the buck stopped with the Editor. He is in-charge or am I mistaken.

Does it mean that if I do not like your post I can filter it out ?

I believe in free expression be it Arjun or Zeemax!!!!

#39 Posted by giani_240

Facts or not, someone (the editor?) did not like what arjun said. Why would that be Gill sahib?

Re: # 27
Chowk Staff,

I am wondering why you are filtering Arjun's posts? Yes, it was long and yes he was being his usual self, but was he factually incorrect? Or is it because Mohammed Gill is the editor and does not like facts!?!

{"But I did mean that Indians should be prepared to see a disgusting war between the fundamentalists"}

GT Sahib,
For too long, the powerful status quo seeking robber barons have been playing the "terrorist" and "fundo" card to maintain their illegitimate positions. Mushy, Bushy, Soodi, Mubarak, and others have milked this cow dry.

While I have no desire to see the Moolas prevail, I do have a conscience and a memory. Didn't the same hypocritical robber barons create the fundos to defeat the commies, who just happened to be a bigger threat at that time? I guess it is simplay a matter of "la bete noire de jour." :)

#32 Posted by Ranjit

Yaar Ranjit,

I did not say that. tahmed sahib thought that I said it. But I did mean that Indians should be prepared to see a disgusting war between the fundamentalists. Especially, if one is not a fundamentalist then he/she: (1) Should not be caught by surprise; (2) Know what to do in such a situation and not whine or moralize.

Regards.

As I have been saying for a while now, this viscious cycle that the US elite have invented and set in circulation, is self sustaining. By giving some rag tags major enemy status, making those that are victims of this 'war on terror' and its obvious injustices, come together in opposition, and then line up behind the US designated "major enemy", will mainstream what was before on the fringes in our society. It is a cat and mouse game in which the higher barbarians (the US elite) drive the reactions of the lower barbarians (the Jihadists) which fuels the machinery of this machine that drives the US permanent war economy. Not only this, there is a move towards conservatism on the 'other side' as well, and just because the war on Iraq has gone sour which has undone some of that in the US, a temporary phenomena in this cycle (remember never did the US public become pro-communist even when some wars were unpopular) the US elite know full well how to push the right buttons to cause a similar swing with another well advertised attack on the home land. Now the particular situations might be dissimilar in the various Muslim countries as they have been for periods even before this new 'farce" WOT, this WOT has by its nature given momentum to forces that traditionally have been used by those that want to maintain the status quo and prevent change.

The lower barbarians dance to the tunes of the higher barbarians, the lower barbarians eventually become mainstream across geographical boundaries, while the people get ground to the bone. Manipulating the psyche of the masses in this manner and then calling it "democracy"- whether at home or abroad is pure BS spouted by someone who is quite ignorant of how the current World System operates, locally and internationally.

Tahmed #31 {"There is a real danger to civilized society in any country no doubt from the superstition, chauvinism, irrationality and simple stupidity that passes for religion in the minds of the extremists. "}

Tahmed Sahib,
Please stop your nonsensical and hypocritical pontifications. You are so full of hot air that one could easily suspect you of being flatulent. In light of the recent announcement that Bangladesh is going to grant citizenship to hundreds of thousands of "stranded Pakis," your chicken little concern over "superstition, chauvinism, irrationality and simple stupidity" sounds very hollow. We all know that, at least on Chowk, you were at the forefront of denying any repatriation to these long-suggering human beings. You are a racist, a bigot, and a charlatan. You seem to waive the largest Paki flag and are obviously the most prominent traitor to both Islam and Pakistan. May the jihadists eliminate you and your type. Ameen.

William Dalrymple,
A very timely and pertinent article. I may not agree with you about the prospect for an orderly, democratic, and Islamic transition in all places, but the prospect of the "liberal, authoritarian" dicatorships and monarchies being demolished en masse is entirely welcome. Thanks.

Ranjit: a merger, with ben laden as the khalifa. i am sure they would agree to that.

Re:GT
"that India should start preparing for war if extremists come to power in Pakistan "

I thought the extremists in Pak were friendly with our Congress and Gandhi, as per Manto. They may simply ask for a peaceful merger of the two countries... :-)

GT: Thanks for the correction.

With respect to internal communal strife that you seem to be concerned might degenerate into communal war, nothing is impossible. There is a real danger to civilized society in any country no doubt from the superstition, chauvinism, irrationality and simple stupidity that passes for religion in the minds of the extremists. How great that danger is, I dont know for sure.

tahmed sahib:

"...and that India should start preparing for war if extremists come to power in Pakistan (correct me if I misunderstood please)..."

Yes you misunderstand me and that too by miles. When fundamentalists become dominant in Pakistan (not necessarily come to power through elections), they will become dominant in India too. (See my post to Naqshbandi). In Pakistan there won't be many to butcher as hamid, you, HP and yes even zeemax are in the US. But imagine the havoc that will come about in India as there are so many Hindus and Muslims to kill. People will do what they 'individually' think is RIGHT. They will have their own morality and so forth - you see in chowk zee and harimau have their own solid morality. You cannot fight these forces through 'morality'. Neither can you through your 'army' (for the armies will side respectively with the mullahs and pundits).

Dear Naqshbandi:

What you state below is a gem:

"...given a free and fair platform a majority of muslims will prefer to vote for people who stand for islam and islamic values and not for those alien paradigms forced on them by imperialist agents..."

I know that kaal has been arguing with you for a long time. But he will be much pleased with what you state above. The above along with your other assetion:

"....what distinguishes islam is that for muslims islam comes first and everything else second ...."

makes your entire point music to the ears of say the Hindu fundamentalists. What you are saying here eloquently, the RSS goons have been saying in a much more crass way albeit for quite a long time now. Then again there are people like Quasmi (see his article on Assam on FP) who strongly agrees with you but will not state it outright, at least not now. Finally there are people like Farzana V., and perhaps even kaal, who may not like your music at all.

For me, I am just starting to appreciate classical music under masters kaal and echoboom.

GT #21 Always a pleasure to read your coherent, well thought through posts.

At the end of your post, you say that fundamentalists forces could come to power in Pakistan through elections, and that India should start preparing for war if extremists come to power in Pakistan (correct me if I misunderstood please). I disagree:

1. all defense forces (including Indian) are supposed to be always ready for war if attacked anyway, so this suggestion seems redundant.

2. fundamentalists in pakistan have very little chance of coming to power through elections (per past voting patterns). Even they know that: Today I heard maulvi fazlurrehman on TV, and he was strongly hinting that musharraf should approach him (like he did a few years ago) and not BB to make a power-sharing deal.

3. even if they do come to power, there is no reason to believe that they will be like the Taliban (i.e. stupid and irresponsible, due to lack of accountability) and not like the Turkish Muslim party now in power (i.e. smart and responsible, knowing that they owe their position to the people, not to God).

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

that is why non-muslims can never truly understand muslims or islam. Muslims, literally, live in a different world.

Sitaaron kay aagay jahaan aur bhi haiN
Ishq kay baaqi imtehaan aur bhi hain

the basic message of this article is correct...given a free and fair platform a majority of muslims will prefer to vote for people who stand for islam and islamic values and not for those alien paradigms forced on them by imperialist agents.

this is nothing new or amazing. what distinguishes islam is that for muslims islam comes first and everything else second.

that is why the notion of an ummah is so revolutionary and powerful.

and why not? Allah says in the Koran that Allah has purchased from the Believers their lives and wealth in return for Paradise and the Prophet also said that a person is not a true believer until Allah and His Messenger are more dear to him/her than anything else.

Everyone who reads 'la ilaha il Allah Muhammadur Rasool Allah' has to have some degree of ishq of Huzoor Paak in their hearts. The degrees and levels of understanding may differ but that the love is their is undeniable. Those who have not got the sweetness of this faith and ishq-e-rasool can never imagine what it is like.

Mr. Dalrymple appears to be on some mission.
“throughout the Muslim world political Islam is on the march;�

Outside of the government sponsored news sites and the US media where do you see political Islam on the march? Yes, the terrorist owned and gangster sponsored Islam is certainly on the March. How could bombing the innocent and destroying the civilian property can be called on the March and since when blasting bombs is political?

The problem with the writers like Mr. Dalrymple is that they try to bunch together several political currents in to one stream. To their convoluted minds that stream is political Islam.

The politics of the Islamic Parties in Pakistan is entirely different than Hammas, Hizab of Lebanon, Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt and the leading pro-religion party in Turkey. One look at their politics would show that they take their guidance not from Islam but from their local conditions. There is no way one can bunch Hammas and the Islamic party in Turkey under one political ideology. They are different and will remain different in their political goals and aspirations.

“In October 2002 a rightwing alliance of religious parties - the Muttahida Majlis Amal or MMA - won 11.6% of the vote, more than doubling its share, and sweeping the polls in the two provinces bordering Afghanistan - Baluchistan and the North West Frontier Province�

That is far from the truth. The MMA did win elections in NWFP but it never swept the polls. It does not even have a 2/3 majority in the Assembly. In Balcohistan, the MMA is a junior partner. JUI, which is a part of MMA now, had always won enough seats in Balochistan to become a junior partner in every Baloch government. JUI was a junior partner with NAP(a secular party) government in Balochistan in 1972. So their success in Balochistan cannot be attributed to the change in the US policy.

A professional historian needs to research before writing outlandish and sweeping statements like the one above.

“Egypt is typical: at the last election in 2005 members of the nominally banned Muslim Brotherhood, standing as independents, saw their representation rise from 17 seats to 88 in the 444-seat people's assembly - a five-fold increase five-fold increase, despite reports of vote-rigging by President Mubarak's ruling National Democratic Alliance.�

“but also in Egypt: since the Brothers' strong showing in the elections, the US has stopped pressing Mubarak to make democratic reforms,�

Read these two statements together. I think Mr. Dalrymple himself is not clued in to what he is writing. This clearly shows that why in a rigged election Mubarak allowed the Muslim Brotherhood to increase its share from 17 to 88.
Perhaps to relieve the US pressure!

It is the same strategy that the Pakistani Army used when it allowed or engineered a MMA victory in NWFP. The purpose was to stave off the US pressure from the Army regime in Pakistan. A tactics they may still use, if the situation begins to get out of hand.

#11 Posted by zeemax on September 21, 2007 3:14:51 am

shouldn't you be more worried about your cab driving surrender monkey army that's either getting whacked or surrendering to the jihadis...

Traditionally, the religious parties there have won only a fraction of the vote. That began to change after the US invasion of Afghanistan.


So a war on terrorists - remember this is a'stan, not iraq - makes pakis vote for people who support terrorists?

And that's somehow America's fault...


mmmkay..

Fundamentalism in politics always existed. What is interesting is their sudden rise in electoral politics. This sudden rise did not start in the Muslim world. The unexpected gains by the BJP in India and the rise of Christian fundamentalism during and after Carter's tenure in the US preceeded the rise of fundamentalism in the Muslim world. Of course it can be argued that fundamentalism was ruthlessly suppressed in countries like Algeria and Egypt and hence their mark on electoral politics is a recent phenomenon.

Being dominant in day to day politics at the grassroot level does not imply dominance in electoral politics. It is here that the author completely misses the plot. The author, in this piece, implies that fundamentalists have become an important part of Muslim polities because of the spread of democracy in these parts. Democracy egged along by American policies. Nothing can be further from the truth. Muslim fundamentalism (just like other religious fundamentalism) has been making tremendous gains in local polities for a much longer time. These movements, at least, in India and Pakistan have been democratizing local socio/economic matters in an environment where 'liberaloons' have been curbing the same process by monopolizing their hold on socio-economic power.

That fundamentalist forces will come to 'power' through the electoral process is a very high probability event. It remains to be seen as to what then? History tells us that there will be violence, e.g. Gujrat under the BJP in India and Afghanistan/Iraq under Bush. But the question is: will the violence go much further? This indeed is a terrifying question and one simply cannot sit back and wait and watch till it happens. At least in India, people should start preparing themselves for this event. An event where right and wrong has to be individually defined. After which people should do their duty of protecting what is right, irrespective of what is moral. As I mentioned earlier ... morality gaya tel leneko.

Dear Dumblimpdick,

Your articles do not add any value and your writings show a lack of political insight. Please feel free to take a much needed holiday to Afghanistan or Wazirastan and then come back to lecture the world on virtues of political Islam.

zeemax: is ben laden threatening to stop using his dialysis machine unless he is made khalifa of india?

#17 Posted by KaalChakra

A believing Muslim has the duty to rebel ...

Yes. It's an obligation, not a choice.

And Islam is one. Not many. Again I quote 7:181!

zee, even a hard-boiled cynic would be amazed at the degree of moral offense Hindus take at the suggestion that the "Indian" Islam is nothing fundamentally different religion than Islam as it is. The idea that Islam is one is the great evil for Hindus!

I had found the recent statement from Al Q to be far beyond the capcities of dollar-counting Hindus to understand. It said: A believing Muslim has the duty to rebel (against injustice, obviously) when he has the *ability* to do so.

Until then there is nothing wrong in 'love' should that keep these folks drunk and high. :)

#15 Posted by harimau,

You're welcome :)

Ref zeemax #11

[Don't say I didn't warn you ... hindoos !]

Thanks for the warning.

The current government in India will react in the only way they know how.

They will call a Cabinet meeting and conduct a circle jerk.

#13 Posted by jayp,

Not before very long it will be very 'real' for macacia as well. The rest of the world will come later :)

zeemax,

At the height of jihad in afghanistan, not even a single indian muslim came forward. Now it is more unlikely. What india has to worry about is teh pakis coming to india and messing things up.

For pakistan it is real, the take over by the jihadis supported by bearded general, and then it is a problem for the world.

#9 Posted by echoboom,

:-)

Don't say I didn't warn you ... hindoos !

Osama bin Laden threatens India

Osama bin Laden and his second in command Ayman al Zawhri have called on Pakistanis to avenge the storming of the Lal Masjid. But what has set alarm bells ringing in Delhi is the reference to the Babri Masjid.

Osama bin Laden's new audio tape is not just another invective against Pakistan, but also goes on to compare President Pervez Musharraf's invasion of the Lal Masjid to that of the Babri Masjid.

“Pervez's invasion of Lal Masjid in the city of Islam, Islamabad, is a sad event, like the crime of the Hindus in their invasion and destruction of the Babari Masjid. And this event has crucial and critical connotations,� said Bin Laden.

This threat comes just a day after the Lashkar e Toiba issued a chilling call for Jihad against the Indian Government. Blaming India for playing an interfering role in Pakistani politics and for the growing violence in that country, Lashkar commander Hafeez Mohammed Saeed said, "Over the past years, India has been busy destabilising Pakistan. So there is a need to strengthen Pakistan's defence. This can only be realised if we step up Jihad in Kashmir and Afghanistan".

This is the third such video to surface after the sixth anniversary of 9/11, but for the Indian Government, what seems to be a cause of worry is the new found interest that the Al Qaeda top leadership is showing for Jihad against it.

(http://www.timesnow.tv/Newsdtls.aspx?NewsID=2901)

echodada, weclome back.

That is PRECISELY what it is. For the very first time in recorded history Pakistani 'secularists' seem worried Islam might possibly hit them in their tender spots.

But they also seem completely confident they will push it into submission again, and good old days will be back.

Zeemax:8 :)
Howdy Pardner?

JUB gaaf lagi phatnay
Khairaat lagi bUtnay :) :)

But I'm glad to see at last the 'K' chowk admin is publishing articles for the other side. Guess they hung out some undergarments as well :)

Re Egypt, that's a bomb waiting to explode. The sentiments there are even stronger than those in Pakistan. It's just that the Egyptian Jihadis are busy elsewhere at the moment. The moment Pakistan/Afghanistan is resolved, Egypt will be the next in a jiffy.

Best business to get in right now is guillotine manufacture.

Author,

Pretending that the Islamists do not exist, and that we will not talk to them, is no answer. Only by opening dialogue are we likely to find those with whom we can work ...

Bit late for that now, at-least in Pakistan. It was true before Jamia Hafsa massacre, but not anymore. The Jamia will be fully avenged as is clear by the unprecendented message personally from the Shaykh Usama Bin Ladin , terming Musharraf an apostate and Abdul Rashid Ghazi as the Shaheed, and the same reinforced by Al Zawahiri - on the same day. It is significant that Usama has never challenged anyone personally, not even Bush, but has done musharraf. Sehba must be hanging out a lot of soiled uniforms now.

This also explains the mutilation of the 16 commandos' bodies handed over in Waziristan. It appears that since they regard them as 'apostates', the most excruciating punishment was seen due to them, right in keeping with Islamic injunctions. The apostate Pak military now stands beaten and demoralized by a bunch of Allah's warriors in sneakers who are giving them prompot payback for their 'victory' over a bunch of schoolgirls in burqas with sticks.

There's a pattern to it all. Measured attacks on Islamabad/Pindi, IEDs to cut off surface logistics (Pak army has no food in Waziristan), abductions and selected releases after indoctrinations prompting mass defections, attack on the crack commando unit despite impenetrable security, and Fatwas towards locally recruited military personnel of not being given even a Muslim burial because of their apostasy.

Next is a major assassination. That will come soon.

And the hindoos should stop jumping like monkeys. Their turn will come once the domestic issues are resolved.

The latest osama video calling for the overthrow of pak army is significant, at last osama has declared his intention to get hold of the bomb.

There are already reports that teh pak army, the 300 or so that surrendered to teh tribals did not fire a shot because they do not want to get killed. The pak army has never fought a war, all from kashmir to kargill was faught by the tribals and as such the pak army is in fear of teh tribals.

This is a situation that teh world has to address, if a few tribals come up to the military place where the nuclear materials are kept, it is more than likely, based on the pak army attitudes as demonstrated recently, the army will let the tribals have what ever they want.

"As long as the west interferes in the Muslim world, bombs will go off; "

sheer propaganda!!

It is the muslim world interfering with the west - no one was worried about the rise of ayotollah's ; pukistani mullahs in the west till they confined their cult of hate in killing mushriqoons , munafiqoons only.

West and the rest of the idolator world gets worried when they start attacking like they did in 9/11 , 7/7, 11/7 , kaargil and so on .

It is a fact that the mullah world 'requires' careful cultivation and breeding of hatred towards kafirs and idolators like me that is the cause of woes of the muslim world.
Muslims have to tame the hate verses of Islam and those riding on the top of those verses in order to attack the non muslim world.
Unless and until Quran is pared down and hadiths banished from the civilized discourse muslim would would keep on suffering from the inherent hatred of Islam.

Yes, political islam has to be accommodated and pakistan is the prime example. India has fenced the border, so is iran, there are hardly any foreign airlines operating to pakistan, hardly any foreign investment there, no tourists go there, and having a pak visa on the passport will ensure that you do not get any other visa, so hard to get out of pakistan because no one will allow them in.

We have a model developing and that is the way islamic republics are to be dealt with. I do not see any problems with that.

Even when clamity happens like the kashmir earth quake, that was used by the jihadis to go to pakistan for weapons training.

The world has to learn from experience and develop a standard approach to islamic republics like pakistan.

Ref echoboom #1

[Isalm's resilience & unique ability to rebound has been unparalleled in the annals of human history.]

The only resilience shown thus far has been your ability to stagger home after an ass-raping by the mullah.

THank you Mr.Dalrymple. You indeed corroborate what muslims have been saying at this forum even prior to 9/11.

The west & the westoxicated scum will indeed be given the Iran-treatment..and not in too distant future either.

Isalm's resilience & unique ability to rebound has been unparalleled in the annals of human history.

"Baatil sey dubnay vaaley aye aasmaaN naheeN hUm
sau baar kar chuukaa hai, too imtihaaN hamaara"
...........................................ALLAMA IQBAL.
tr:
Oh heavens, suppressed we can't be by the secularoon creed
Hundreds of times have we been put to this test by you
echoboom