Where is Ibn-Sina of the 21st Century?

Re: # 160 mohar [ "... :)... banking and jihad...

No wonder pakiland is so ****ed uo..." ]

Tell me about it... What a toxic brew. What noxious fumes... Phew. Not to mention corruption and unethical conduct thrown into the mix for extra flavoring.

Geeezus... golly..!!!!!

...SR

PS: Unfortunately, we got side tracked in this silly pissing match ... and in the mean time #151 went unanswered.

Those who claim that the Quran does not contradict "EQUAL RIGHTS MYTH" between the sexes are strangely silent.

#160 Posted by mohar11,

Yeah .. well ... that's true. Do you see any dichotomy between the two?

ok - let me get this - one of pakiland's central bankers who manages pakiland's "cross-currency debt or a foreign reserves portfolio" is actually an out and out Jihadi?...

zee dude, you da man... :)... banking and jihad...

No wonder pakiland is so ****ed uo...

#158 Posted by SR,

Dear SR,

I'm a central banker, right here in Pakistan, as my friends on this forum know. Happy now?

Sorry I took your joy away in threatening to blow any cover or reporting me to any ISI for my firm Islamist stand. I know these army intelligence types perhaps a bit more than you do from your stupid batch mates at Hasan Abdaal. I know these idiots very well and how much they are worth.

Did I just spoil your puny sport?

Re the acumen in pedaling groceries or gas stations, that's a bit different from managing a country's cross-currency debt or a foreign reserves portfolio.

That's over and out as far as I'm concerned. But you can continue fishing in a pool of piss (mootar wich machhian pharna) if you like :)

Regards.

Re: # 155 zeemax [ "...get your kid circumcised.

People who ... run cheap grocery stores ... should not attempt talking about markets and economies. ..." ]

Wah... Is this the best you could do?

The tip of my son's penis is none of your god-damned business. If he grows up and wants it chopped off he can do it any time. I didn't think there was much point to it so I didn't subject him to it. I act on my convictions, instead of just jawboning them.

I put my money where my mouth is and I am not a corporate whore, nor have I climbed the ladder by clawing my way up, selling my soul to the devil and being a pimp to wealthy clients openning the door to my bedroom.

Ever since the crash of 1987 I have maintained that the control one has over one's investments, like gravity and the intensity of light, diminishes with the square of distance between you and your investments. I have denounced paper assets as organised theft and maintained that one must invest in tangible assets.

You think that calling me a rikshaw wala or an dukandar is going to insult me. Wrong. The fact that I've considered small neighborhood business -- restaurants, grocery stores -- and taxis (the ones with rubber tires -- not stelleto heels) as a superior investment to mutual funds is a matter of pride for me. And yes, cheap grocery store are a better value for money with a superior rate of return than slick expensive ones where the rich shop. So apart from that one big Italian restaurant fiasco I've never lost money in a small business. Same goes for taxi cabs.

Look, I am not threatening you with anything. I don't have any sway over anyone in the ISI... That was simply your paranoia (what you mentioned in your private dispatch). But I am willing to let this go, if you right here because I have no wish to expose you and your doings. The ball is entirely in your court.

As far as I am concerned this matter can end right here, right now after this post. To honor what you wrote to me privately, I will "...not make a public spectacle..." of this any further than this, "...for old times sake..."

...SR

Re: # 155

Zeemax Sahib:

"...run cheap grocery stores all their lives should not attempt talking about markets and economies...."

With all due respect to you. Samll grocery store operators, infact truly operate the market day in day out, and operate in Adam Smith's pure capitalistic economy. Obviously, your insults apart.

Re: # 153 "Are you willing to unveil yourself and take the gloves off? I think not."

Sohail - spill the beans....this sort of titillation is not on. Having stripped zeemax this much you must continue and complete the deed. Now be a man!

#153,

Fuck off and get your kid circumcised.

People who have never done anything more than run cheap grocery stores all their lives should not attempt talking about markets and economies.

#153 Posted by SR on December 15, 2007 8:11:08 pm


except perhaps that you were drunk as a skunk.


hai allah...zeemax was drinking!!....what would allah say about that?

Re: # 137 zeemax [ "...Mr. SR's knowledge of Islam is limited to faithfreedom.org, and that's where he wants it to remain - because he's an admitted murtad. ..." ]

Zahid sahib

If you want to have a mud slinging match in this public forum, so be it. But I advise you against it.

My identity is know to all and I have nothing to hide. You, on the other hand, hide behind the veil of a pseudonym. Old Chowk readers know that you and I are personally know to one another and they may also have picked on the fact that we have had a falling out.

People realise that basically you are resentful and cannot swallow the reality that I who is a non-professional layman, was right while you, who is supposed to be the professional was wrong in your judgement and prediction about some macroeconomic questions about international finance. (US$ vs Euro and Gold etc...) You resents that... Your ego cannot handle it.

As a result, last time you were in Lahore I visited you at Eden Heights apartment where you were spending the night, you started abusing and insulting me for no reason at all, except perhaps that you were drunk as a skunk. I finally got upset and told you "fuck off" and left.

Are you willing to unveil yourself and take the gloves off? I think not.

You lunatic jihadi rants are on record and regardless of what you rave about, basically you are a comfort loving creature and will not want the ISI monitoring these sites to come and nab you under the terrorist act. Would you?

I am sorry it had to come to this, but you leave me little choice.

...SR

i think muslims should start reading, iqbals, reconstruction of modern islamic thought. that will change their attitude. wahabism aflight on petro dollars is the major cause of trouble for islam. kill the saudi royal family and there will be peace.

Re: # 112 masadi [ "...SR writes "These are derived from the dictums of the Quran"...

Nonsense ... when you don't know anything about Islam and the Quran, please SHUT UP.

You cannot just throw out claims without knowing anything about the issues involved in the particular claims.

...not to base your propagandistic understanding of Islam on popular films and rants of Christian evangelicals..."]

Re: # 112 abu safwan [ "...Don't believe everything that CBN and pat robertson tell u. etc...etc...
..."]

My dear Sirs,

I admire your confidence and your strong feelings, but I dare say that you are being 'apologists'. You gentlemen seem to think you know your theology, but my dear friends, you seem to have far more 'faith in' than you have 'knowledge of' the Quran.

I am forced to conclude that you are either ignorant or dishonest. I suspect, however, that you are merely ignorant, for it does seem that you are both honest and upright gentleman.

The myth of equality of rights (men vs. women in Islam) that your creative imagination has invented does not pass the test of Quranic injunctions.

Now it would be fine if you only claimed that Quran was a collection of the sayings of the Prophet
(while he was in a certain 'altered' state, and had visions of the angel Gabriel) then we could explain the things away by invoking Semitic culture and tradition in those times and say that men did more travel and business etc, etc, and since women at that time did not have worldly experience, therefore such injunctions were issued for a temporary period, or some other excuse like that. For this is the kind of argument you (abu safwan) seem to be giving.

But if you assert forcefully that the Quran is nothing less than the unadulterated Word of The Almighty Allah, then such an excuse cannot be considered valid. Minor errors that the Prophet can be easily understood to have made owing to his specific times and his cultural environment, cannot be accepted if the source is to be Allah.

IF Allah actually condescended to dictate HIS/HER Book through The Prophet, then HE/SHE (Allah) being all knowing and all powerful, damn well must have known how other cultures in later centuries will be. Therefore, any contextual excuse (like local cultural considerations) can not be used as an apology to explain away the diminishing of women's rights. I'm sorry, respected friends, but your logic rests on very thin ice.

I would have had much greater respect for you (though I would still reject your views) if you had been honest and courageous enough to say that this was how Allah ordered it in the Quran and therefore you don't question it even if it is unpopular in the light of modern thinking.

Please check the holy book and find the following:

(Note: Some ayats are quite long and cover several other things, so in the interest of brevity, I am inserting the words (…etc, etc,…) and reproducing only those portions that are the relevant portion here… If the ayat is brief then it is not edited)

1) Muslim men can, but women cannot marry outside Islam

Surah al-Mumtahana (#60), Ruku # 2, ayat # 10 (place of origin: Medina)

O ye who believe! When believing women come … (etc etc) … They are not lawful for the disbelievers, nor are the disbelievers lawful for them. And give the disbelievers that which they have spent (upon them. …(etc, etc)…That is the judgment of Allah. …(etc, etc)…

Surah al-Maida (#5), Ruku 1, ayat #5 (origin : Medina)
…(etc, etc…) The food of the People of the Book is lawful unto you and yours is lawful unto them. (Lawful unto you in marriage) are (not only) chaste women who are believers but chaste women among the People of the Book revealed before your time when ye give them their due dowers and desire chastity not lewdness nor secret intrigues. …(etc, etc…)

2) a) Two Women witnesses equal to One Man.
2) b) Women inherit half as much property as men.

Surah al-Baqarah (#2), Ruku 39, ayat #282

…(etc, etc)…And get two witnesses out of your own men and if there are not two men then a man and two women such as ye choose for witnesses so that if one of them errs the other can remind her…(etc, etc)… Note: (The context in this ayat is, as abu safwan correctly said, regarding commercial transactions)

Surah An-Nisaa (# 4), Ruku 2, ayat 11 and 12

Allah (thus) directs you as regards your children's (inheritance): to the male a portion equal to that of two females: if only daughters two or more their share is two-thirds of the inheritance; if only one her share is a half. ..(etc, etc)…These are settled portions ordained by Allah and Allah is All-Knowing All-Wise.

In what your wives leave your share is a half if they leave no child; but if they leave a child ye get a fourth; after payment of legacies and debts. In what ye leave their share is a fourth if ye leave no child; but if ye leave a child they get an eighth; after payment of legacies and debts…(etc, etc)…

Ruku 24, ayat # 177

…(etc, etc)… If a man die childless and he have a sister, hers is half the heritage, and he would have inherited from her had she died childless. And if there be two sisters, then theirs are two-thirds of the heritage, and if they be brethren, men and women, unto the male is the equivalent of the share of two females. Allah expoundeth unto you, so that ye err not. Allah is Knower of all things.



Who cares if the discrimination is in criminal law or in civil law. Discrimination is discrimination. I never asserted that it was a women's criminal law testimony that was considered half that of a man. This is an unnecessary dichotomies.

Furthermore, you (abu safwan) seem to be saying that this particular injunction of the Quran wouldn't necessarily be valid in our times.

Since there are women in the Business world today one can safely argue that the ayah is referring to a particular time period as the Quran so often does.

Is this what you are saying? Because if you keep dropping verses which have become 'obsolete' many more verses of the Quran can be (rightfully) discarded into the dustbin of history. Are you really saying that? If you are, then we have no further argument.

Next is the concept of houris of paradise...? Without reproducing the ayats here I am going to give you references only (in the interest of space and time). It is very clear that the houris are supposed to be virgins and act as 'wives' for the faithful men (and men only). Also, their beauty has been assured. No such promises for the pious women, alas. Here are the references:

a) Surah Ad-Dukhan (44), Ruku 3, ayat 54 (Several ayats here describe the 'blessings of Paradise' for the pious.

b) Surah At-Tur (52), Ruku 1, ayat #20 (again description of Paradise in several ayats)

c) Surah Ar-Rehman (55), Ruku 3, ayat # 72 - 74 (once again depictions of Paradise over several ayats)

d) Surah Al-Waqi'a (56), Ruku 1, ayat # 22 (yet again in the context of rewards await the pious in Paradise)

Please be faithful to the facts at least.

regards

...SR

Do not ask what your religion can do for you,
ask what you can do for your religion

anil ji, guess, the old cliche captures it best: challenge is walking the fine line between not learning anything from history and being enslaved by it. Between using history as one of the many factors guiding us into the future and turning it into a total prison for ourselves.

Re: # 143

Eklavya:

"...As to Hinduism, we just don't know. We have only had fifty odd years of freedom after thousand years of slavery..."

Your point is well put.

Although its main effect is reactionay that many people start searching for answers and reasons for anger in the past, and become as regressive anything that was in the enslaved past. Such people continue to be regressive and cannot give up the past. We can observe it here as well.

Re: # 135

Hamindm Sahib:

"...something someone high on bhang or mushrooms or some other wild herb made up while on a bad trip..."

So now you believe the Hinduism means inclusion of all. How about contributing to it while high on your Whiskey and Soda.

Please try not be jealous, Hinduism beats all others combined "10 to 1" on myth creation is the game. Looks pretty bad to a competitive guy in the loosing side. Even if you are the best, there are too many on the winning side, so don't even think of switching the side.

Just accept your Karma...