The Irreverent Hero Islam Forgot

Ref MantoLives #384

[Yawn. Now you are sounding like a broken record.]

Gandhi was a caste-ist fascist racist pig.

Eklavya,

When a Shankaracharya visits a dalit locality to baptize a temple, does that mean the Shankaracharya has assumed responsibility over the religious lives of the population along with the temple/God or he just merely emphasizes that he is just the care-taker of God and he has nothing to do with the worshippers.

If the notion, Shakarar thinks for the worshippers too, is right, then can we conclude that the worshippers would not hate to see one of them occupying the coveted post?

guru, nkg, cheem sahib

You all made very good points. Essentially, I am a very optimistic person, and know that so long as the direction is right, and we keep moving and changing ahead, we will reach our goals. (Thumbs up to all of you).

Re: # 372 Ekji,

Quickly: India has changed! The crux you missed was Upanayan part in my post. Pendulum moved to extreme of westernization few years back but now younger generation is in search of roots and true spirituality. Sanatan Dharma (hate to use hinduism because it is not a religion or dogma started by an individual) answers their questions without being dogmatic.

dont know much about Shankaracharya except some dispute Chatrapati Shivaji had in installing a lwer caste as a Shankaracharya of Kolhapur. As I recall to be a Shankaracharya one needs to be a celebate thru out ones life. You asking Harijan to be Shankaracharya is like asking Dalai Lama to be chosen from White Plains New York and not from Snowy Maountains in Asia. They choose lama based on revelation to the earlier Lama. With my limited level of consciousness I do not understand their selection process. Should I make a big deal of that? Does this Shankaracharya affects me? Does he send fatwas for me to act upon? Why should I care who is vice-chancellor of the university which me or my kids are not going to attend?

My own exposure to Sanatan Dharma / Hinduism was through the rituals (4 fasts per week and extreme religiosity) of my mother. Got little understanding of the philosophy and reasons behind those when read and interacted with Swami chinmayananda and his disciples. The ritual which I followed of fasting and going to Hanuman temple on Saturday, started at age 7 as a prayer for the quick recovery of neighbor/friend's mother. She was suffering from cancer. Rituals start for most of us in this innocuous way. Now I cannot give that up. As a teen I could safely hide behind Hanuman and not deal with raw sexual desires and later sublimate into hobbies and interests. Whenever I stopped fasting some weird melancholy set in.

Sanatan Dharma is association with Swami Chinmayananda starting from 78 in Pawai, Mumbai, hugs and company of Ma Amrutananda, bhiksha my wife gives to assorted swamis when they visit our part of the world, introduction to TM and wonderful westerners in the fold and most importantly Bikram Yoga. I have my own rope tied to my neck. As Cheema conveyed what is the point in trading that for someone else's, which might look sexy at this moment. When the talk of religion stops true spirituality begins. I should be only be concerned for next Dharana-Dhyan-Samadhi so that I set myself free atleast for some time.

"
Ma Amritananda once described ego like this: "There was a cowherd boy who took his cows to the meadows every morning and brought them back to the cowshed at the end of the day. One evening, as he was tying the cows up for the night, the boy found that one of them was missing her rope. He feared that she might run away, but it was too late to go and buy a new rope. The boy didn't know what to do, so he went to a wise man who lived nearby and sought his advice. The wise man told the boy to pretend to tie the cow, and make sure that the cow saw him doing it. The boy did as the wise man suggested and pretended to tie the cow. The next morning the boy discovered that the cow had remained still throughout the night. He untied all the cows as usual, and they all went outside. He was about to go to the meadows when he noticed that the cow with the missing rope was still in the cowshed. She was standing on the same spot where she had been all night. He tried to coax her to join the herd, but she wouldn't budge. The boy was perplexed. He went back to the wise man who said, "The cow still thinks she is tied up. Go back and pretend to untie her." The boy did as he was told, and the cow happily left the cowshed.

This is what the guru does with the ego of the disciple. The guru helps untie that which was never there. Like the cow, due to our ignorance, we believe that we are bound by the ego when, in fact, we are completely free. We need to be convinced of this, however".

As there are not many guru's like that in Western Culture, we can help each other Let Go of what really is not there. The only commitment to allow such a process is an intent for "gnothi seauton",...Gnow Thyself.

Vicente Marco © 2002, 2005

"

BTW, RSS/DnyanPrabhodini trains lower castes and women to become priests. Many women priests conduct marriages and cremation sanskar. (Ch. Shahu started this 100 years back. Himself became Sanskrit scholar.) There is a movement in making people aware of all the Sanskars one has to go thru in ones life, so that a person can enter into different phases of life knowingly and with commitment for some values. Wish I was born 30 years later. When I see these youngsters I see a pleasant dawn of real India.

Hope all these personal things help some one. I need to stop visiting chowk.

Re: # 363

Yawn. Now you are sounding like a broken record.

Re: # 378
Ekalavya...
These Sankaracharya are just kind of leaders of some obsolete group. Why don't you join R K Mission ( Ramakrishna Mission)? Once you are sanyasi ( after 7 years of Brahmacharya), you will get some name like Swami XXXananda....No previous life...
Brahmins of yesteryear used to be called as Dwija ( born twice). When you complete Brahmacharya, you are sage ( Swami)...

Re: # 380; Eklavya

I'd be honoured to meet you and tahmed both; that may not be as far fetched as you think!

Gotta go

Re: # 356 Tahir

who stepped on your 'poochhal' today paaji?

Cheema ji, since there is no sufi here around, we can safely confess that at the end of the day, we all face fairly similar problems, and respond in fairly similar ways. For all our 'differences' if tahmedji, you, and I (or some other friends from chowk) had occasion to meet we will get just along perfectly.

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

That sufi reference is a bit of private joke. I have deliberately built a little history of determinedly rejecting all sufi claims of 'sameness' just so we take another look at a few of our basic assumptions. :):)

Re: # 370; Eklavya:
"tahmedji, I wish things were as simple or as good as that".

I rest my case sir. the above applies not just to Hinduism but other man-made religious traditions just the same, 'semitic/abrahamic' nonsense no exception (btw, most bog-standard Muslims wouldn't have a clue what 'Abrahamic' is! or the connection with Judaism/Christianity etc; this is a old concept recently re-introtuced by the West and Muslims alike; 'the west' so they can keep this nonsense under some control; Muslims because it gives them a sense of satisfaction that they 'belong' to the group of the HAVES of the world, albeit going through a bad phase at present!).

My advice as a well-wisher is, if you are dis-illusioned or disgruntled with your ancestoral traditions, don't try to find solace in another; from a practical viewpoint things may not be much different when you get down to the nitty gritty. That is why converts always appear more enthusiastic because they are trying to justify their decision not just to the world around them, but more importantly to themselves (it is obvious and well known that more than 98% of individuals continue to believe in the nonsense they have been taught since childhood; some 'so-called enlightened' folk delude themselves by 're-interpreting' this same nonsense to make some sense out of it; it retains its original label/title though!).

Best to rely upon one's own metal in this world, I reckon. Use the brain one has been given by nature through millions of years of evolution (OR from a fairy from a parallel universe - depends which version one 'believes' I suppose).

I don't know the 'answer' to the big 'question' any more than any other from the human species; may be it IS 42! Just don't think Zaphod Beeblebrox is any better in that respect than yourself!

Again (before someone jumps down my throat again), believe in Santa Clause for all I care, just don't hold your breath with regards to your wishes though!

Sorry for a slightly dis-jointed post, very busy at present. Must rush but will talk soon when I have more time.

Cheers.

ajeya, it is true that my lower caste associations might give me a little chip on my shoulders, but should you (or any one of us) be surprised by that?

That's the point I tried to make earlier about Baba Sahib too.


[Shankaracharayas don't mean anything much to me, beyond than the knowledge and wisdom they bring with them. I am only interested the position's symbolic value. Yes, I dream of a dalit shankaracharya one day - because the tradition itself is too valuable to be given up and without my lower caste brothers on it it is too denuded of humanity to REALLY win my personal admiration.

I admire it, but not TOTALLY, as teenagers might say.]

Now, you may argue all this is teenager logic anyway. I have no problem with being a teenager with dreams on matters so important to all of us. :)

#373 tahmed32

[More seriously - too much of what passes as "religion" is merely primitive culture. It is only the core that makes sense and is timeless. Thus: 200 years ago, maulvis in Turkey were up in arms because the ottoman caliph was being pushed by the UK govt (in turn due to lobbying by Abolitionists in UK) to end the custom of slavery (which included open markets for female slaves sold as concubines). The maulvis were up in arms against this saying the practice of concubines is permitted in Islam and this was an attack on Islam.

Time passed, Turkish culture evolved so women are no longer sold and today no maulvi would dream of considering female slaves to be part of Islam. Same for hinduism.

So, just be happy that you are a hindu who through the powers of his common sense has freed himself from the shackels of the past and so does not need to look at the "greener grass" on other pastures ... and is thus a Shankaracharya. ]

A good and sensible post. But let me correct a typical Abrahamic way of thinking:

If you are referring to Hindu "culture" as Hindu "religion", then your post is accurate. But if you are referring to hindu "philosophy" as Hindu "religion", then your post is not. If you take the time to read the Hindu philosophers (the philosphies of Dualism, non-Dualism etc.), you will find that they are based on incisive, non-dogmatic arguments, and have very little to do with what passes for "hindu culture". You are free to argue and disagree, and NO ONE BELONGS TO IT. It is just philosophy - a way of looking at and analyzing the world. It is a far cry from djinns swooshing around and muhammad riding his horse over the moon.

While it is true that human nature and thus human culture in different parts of the world have a lot in common with each other, hindu philosophy and the Abrahamic philosophies (or the lack thereof) have little in common.

#370 Eklavya

[We must work to be able to offer EVERYONE who prepares himself or herself through learning and other commitments the SAME respect, not deprive them because of some "caste restrictions" that more and more Hindus now find silly, at least ideally.]

Would you like to give us an example of ANY ONE "low-caste" hindu who "prepared himself or herself through learning and other commitments", but were "deprived" because of caste restrictions?

[My guess is that to be formally one has to be a brahmin to be nominated a Shankaracharya. The position doesn't mean much to many many Hindus, but it is important symbolically.]

See my previous question to you about "nomination".

[As I said, if my grandfather heard me say this, he would have thrown a fit, but then he lived at a different time, and we live in a new time. At least I can dream :)]

Yes. Like the Martin Luther "I have a Dream" speech. You are not fooling anyone with this father/grandfather story. It is pretty clear that you are the prototypical "low-caste" hindu chowk-resident with a very big chip on your shoulders.

#372 Eklavya

[guru ji, if Hinduism is the religion of people, then it has to be the religion of the 'lower castes.' So obviously, it is the lower-caste sages who have kept us alive and going.

But I just want to be able to formally see one of them nominated a shankaracharya...It will a great symbolic thing, and will obviously upset many many good people, just because it has never been done before :)]

I am not sure what you are saying from your "lower caste hindu" perspective, so would you do me a favour and give us some historic references for these "nominations" that you are talking about?

Then maybe I'll have a better understanding of your perspective. Because, as of now, I don't have a clue.

Thanks tahmedji, if not myself, at least I can campaign to make vengat or my friend muthu shankaracharyas if they would like to consider that position. :)

[I know, this idea might be upsetting some friends. Apologies in advance. It's a dream some of us want to dream.]

#370 Shankaracharya Elavya Bhai: I trust you are not a brahmin and yet you are a Shankaracharya. I rest my case. :-)

More seriously - too much of what passes as "religion" is merely primitive culture. It is only the core that makes sense and is timeless. Thus: 200 years ago, maulvis in Turkey were up in arms because the ottoman caliph was being pushed by the UK govt (in turn due to lobbying by Abolitionists in UK) to end the custom of slavery (which included open markets for female slaves sold as concubines). The maulvis were up in arms against this saying the practice of concubines is permitted in Islam and this was an attack on Islam.

Time passed, Turkish culture evolved so women are no longer sold and today no maulvi would dream of considering female slaves to be part of Islam. Same for hinduism.

So, just be happy that you are a hindu who through the powers of his common sense has freed himself from the shackels of the past and so does not need to look at the "greener grass" on other pastures ... and is thus a Shankaracharya.

guru ji, if Hinduism is the religion of people, then it has to be the religion of the 'lower castes.' So obviously, it is the lower-caste sages who have kept us alive and going.

But I just want to be able to formally see one of them nominated a shankaracharya...It will a great symbolic thing, and will obviously upset many many good people, just because it has never been done before :)

As an Islamic equivalent, a shankaracharyas would the head of a small number of the most important mosques around the world.

tahmedji, I wish things were as simple or as good as that :(

Anybody can be a 'thinker' but the formal position of a Shankaracharya implies a certain degree of respect (not following).

We must work to be able to offer EVERYONE who prepares himself or herself through learning and other commitments the SAME respect, not deprive them because of some "caste restrictions" that more and more Hindus now find silly, at least ideally.

My guess is that to be formally one has to be a brahmin to be nominated a Shankaracharya. The position doesn't mean much to many many Hindus, but it is important symbolically.

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

As I said, if my grandfather heard me say this, he would have thrown a fit, but then he lived at a different time, and we live in a new time. At least I can dream :)

eklavia: i dont think there is any restriction on a dalit from becoming a thinker of deep thoughts (aka shankacharya per my google check). so how does hinduism come in the way?

#367 "No one needs to be Hindu, religion wise. It's your culture .. one cannot change his parents."

this must be the famous hindu logic. by this logic, you should be walking on all fours - since that is the way your ancestors walked 20-30 million years ago.

Re: # 366:
Ekbhai,

No one needs to be Hindu, religion wise. It's your culture .. one cannot change his parents.

What is this RSS? There is a school in Pune DnyanPrabhodini which my boys attended initially hesitantly, instead of MercBenz IB school. We had reservations about the school because the school was Marathi medium and was founded by some one who was associated with RSS and the school maintains strong links to RSS. Boys really enjoyed esp travel/trips to remote part of India. Working with hands in fields and selling books. Their language barrier and diffidences disappeared in no time. Our boys ran a canteen on their own based on the diet based on Ayurved for age 13-14 year old. The syllabus is CBS. The difference is learning Sanskars such as Upanayan. Upanayan is done by every one even girls. Mind that we are not Bramhin. In the first week our driver was furious because our sons had to be taken to the worst part of the town in a slum area for a birthday party of their classmate. Whole class spent half a day in one room slum hut. A generation or two back even though I attended "Rs.2 per month school", never had a Bhangi as a peer. More than thirty percent of the class belongs to the lowest of the strata. Not reservation but school reaches out and teachers/student/alumni prepare the kids from this strata, so that they clear the school entrance exam whose results are 1-2% get admition. School with the help of students runs a migratory school and health camps for kids of migrant workers and construction workers. School is big on Jungian Psychology. In my time the school used to send the most no of kids to IITs in Maharashtra. Thru my leftist goggle I had saw the school of Bramhin and for Bramhin. Some of the dedicated teachers are OBCs and even SC/S. I hate to use these castists terms. The school was refreshing oasis in the desert of consumerim and superficial westernization in the name of globalization. Kids were exposed to the good of India. Kids learned classical music, bharat natyam, Marathi drama without losing anyhing in Math & Science. Social Project based approach made real growth possible. If I compare to my schooling in Kolhapur ... learned nothing besides gali-galloch and fighting .. shear wastage of childhood..

Shankarachayas are happening from lower castes for some time. Thanks to Ch Shahu of Kolhapur. The recent one is Narendra Maharaj who is from SC/ST... may not be exactly Harijan. If u r raising ur consciousness then title of Shankaracharya of certain Peethas does not matter to u. Hindu culture is not dependent on these peethas. Sufi Saibaba preserves Hinduism much better. Most of the Swamis and Rishis were Dalit. SC/ST or nonBramhins such as Chinmayanand, Valmiki, Vyasa, Kabir, Rohidas, most of the Varakari Sants were nonBramhi, Dalits and one Muslim.

So if I were u, unless I experience some thing bad I would not label because of some columnist writing/shouting in his echo chamber. My experience is limited ie thru this school. But it was so much better that my own reservation about RSS have disappeared. They might be little uncompromising idealist. The school had large portraits of Mahatma Phule, Ambedkar, Shivaji and surprisingly of Arabindo. Principal an RSS member had association to Pondichery.

Vengat

I, personally, will be happy being a 'Hindu' when a 'Dalit' becomes a Shankaracharya. Until then, the base-level Indic faith is simply not living upto its potential.

That idea would have made my grandfather very upset, would have made my dad chuckle, and positively excites me. So we will see how long it takes to materialize. Slow and steady..., since are not revolutionizing people.

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

nkg, guru bhai

You put us in a difficult situation. Some of what you say is true - Baba Sahib had his great strengths, other leaders had theirs. Isn't combining the strengths of great poeple and great ideas, and respecting them all if they respect us, our great strength?

Some of what you wrote, I would submit is not totally fair. Baba Sahib worked with different actors to get the best deal possible WITHOUT hurting anyone else, and when Gandhi ji put his put down (for ultimately, good of all, as we saw later) he complied. He was a great constitutionalist, no doubt, but he was above all, a man of a great heart. And he really had no reason to have any love for the RSS or anybody else who did not reach out to him.

We are not a land of perfect people. And we don't have to agree with every aspect of everybody. Our great things get done because everybody does his or her little part, sometimes happily, sometimes unhappily, without breaking the house down. Nothing is gained by abusing Gandhi for drinking goat's milk. And nothing at all by expecting Baba Sahib to have been the all-knowing, all-capable perfect man.

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

Yes, tamil brahmins have gotten a raw deal. But, as a fan of Tamilians in general, I can tell you, they are ALL great and brilliant folks, brahmins and non-Brahmins. As to discrimination, I have always argued that they have carried the heavey burden of our collective sins, not just their own. Let's hope the pendulum swings back to the middle soon.

(Sorry for the soap box. I just feel strongly about this issue. Hope you would not take any of this amiss. Thanks for understanding.)

Re: # 364
Molega,

My dad always says that Thamizh Brahmin girls make great wives and mothers...:)

Nkg,

There are always two sides to a coin...I don't believe, assuming you are from a different state, it is easy for a non-Tamil to have a clear grasp of the complete picture.

Re: # 362

Molaga,

Thanks for slowing down things. I do not see Tamizh :) Brahmins as aliens and I have never done that in the past. I will have to tell you that I have spent a big part of my childhood in the Agraharam. My family has supported them quite decently. My dad's brother, a doctor, has been practicing his profession in Agraharam for the past 30 years. He is a very religious man and Periyaval and others in the mutt knew him very well.

I think this should have given you a clear idea about my moorings. To be candid, Tamizh Brahmins have come out, to my understanding, of what could be termed as their difficult period. Though I do not want to dwell on it for long, I can say that Periyar had the right reasons. I see they have melted into the rest of the population without any trace. Its my conviction that they have understood the danger of isolating from the rest of society.

It is quite painful when somebody tries to picture Non-Brahmin Tamizhs as hate mongers and people of lower intellect when comparing to the Brahmins. It's commonsense that intelligence cannot be inherited.

Brahmins belong to this land as much as anybody else. Nkg's was a false assertion and it was a sweeping statement. I believe in reacting proportionally.

I am not a great admirer of Karunanidhi but when you look at things objectively he has been good to the Brahmins than Jayalalitha. But for him Sankaracharyas would have been spending their days in the jail and JJ was behind it.

I hope Harimaus of Chowk understand or stop feigning that they don't understand. In todays Tamilnadu, Brahmins are as much relevant as they were in the pre-DK period. They have not lost their social standing as you claim though they do not pull the strings from the top anymore. At a societal level they still wield enormous influence.

I have to leave now...I would want to speak to you on reservation and the reasons behind it...

P.S:- I have seen Brahmins coming to my dad's brother to know which way the cotton should be wound for kuthuvilakku wick ;)...

manto writes "How is it a Strawman?

Did you not write this?

"Muslims would have become a formidable force in India politically if this division didn't fragment them into 3"


Lawyer sahib, you really need to work on your comprehension abilities, that was presented by me not as a "cause" of the partition but a "consequence" of it- thereby busting the farcial reason presented by the MAJ and his colonial "behind the scenes" partners that Muslims of India would somehow be strenghtened by the partition so they should go for it....you are still pushing that argument when you claim- without knowing a goddmaned thing about me- that were it not for Jinnah I'd be in some sewer somewhere...like I said earlier the Church of MAJ is dead and soon it will be expunged from the minds of the Muslims of Pakistan- they are getting conscious with every new shenanigan of the US elite. Recently Nawaz Sharif surprised me by saying " For the peace of others, we will not turn Pakistan into a killing field", tells me that this is a apt reply to Bush and the Hamid types who tout " If we don't fight them there we will be fighting them at home in the US"

Dear Vengat # 361 and 360

I wonder what prompted ur outburst against nkg. I don't agree to his views...but ur remarks on Tamizh Brahmins were unwarranted and uncharitable.

The TN Brahmins have a deep sense of alienation....not because of the fine Tamil people, who have always recognised and respected Brahmins as resourceful and industrious people, but because of the anti-brahmanical stance of the Governing class. The real issue for Brahmins in TN is NOT one of opportunity (they are capable of finding their way)....but the anti-brahmanical polemic from the Political class.
(For e.g, even in the middle of 2007 Karunanidhi made unpleasant remarks on brahmins and when the OBC saga erupted, the pro-quota brigade in TN turned their ire towards brahmins).

Unfortunately, even you seem to have taken this recourse - of calling them crammers and people who wagged their tails for the Brits. Please review the freedom struggle in TN and you will find quite a lot of Tamil Brahmins taking lead in the struggle.

The brahmins benefitted mostly because a majority of them were based in cities and in industrial towns and hence had access to English education. Once educated they managed to establish themselves as doctors and other professionals.

Periyar (and later Karunanidhi) rightfully broke the Brahmin dominance and today they have absolutely NO political/economical clout.

P.S -
1. Throwing away all philosphical/religious discouse into garbage, the TN brahmins are a separate group in themselves. I don't know if words like separate "race" or "ethnicity" can be attributed...but the Tamil Brahmin's group-allegiance is NOT merely restricted to religious principles.

2. I support caste-based reservations...but NOT the way it is implemented in TN where it is heavily stacked in favor of the cream amongst BCs, MBCs and even in certain SCs. 89% of Tamizhs are grouped under one of the quota category. Do u genuinely think that 89% of Tamizhs are backward ?? Obviously not.

3. I know the difference in the cut-offs for BCs and OCs is negligible. But that beggars the question - why then the difference in categories. Can't then the BC category be merged with the OC category ??

Nkg,

If you are serious to know about What, Why and How of TN history, I am open for a discussion of a place of your choice. But, yes that is contingent on the deliverables I have at work.

As an appetizer or to give you a head start, try to find out the cut-off difference, for all courses, between open category and the rest of them, in Tamilnadu...


Ciao

Re: # 347

Nkg,

"In Tamilnadu, more than 67% seats are reserved (now Karunanidhi included Muslims and Christians) to suppress Tamil brahmins...That failed"

I am sorry I have to disagree...Can you tell me what failed? It was not aimed at suppressing Brahmins but to enable the uninitiated masses into education. Please do not attribute this ingenuity to Karunanidhi, rather it was advocated by Periyar.

Tamil Brahmins are enterprising people like the rest of the discriminated people. The nature of their profession, which they had been practicing for several 100 years, gave them an unfair edge over others to master Lord Macaulay's idea of education.

Until Lord Macaulay's education gained importance, everyone were educated as far as their domains were concerned. Now tell me what can a history graduate IAS, if you want him to be a Brahmin the be it so, bring in path breaking ideas into the already teetering Indian agri? Brahmins took their cramming ability as an undue advantage to lord over other communities. The problem further aggravated when they cosied up with the British and became one within...

Now tell me if the inventors had been Brahmins, why is that the Brahmins during the British rule did not have in their posession all of the knowledge you claim that they already posessed?

Nobody feels happy to see Brahmins suffer in Tamilnadu...Do you know the latest comedy that happened in TN. The TN government has promulgated that anybody could be a priest provided he learn all that are required to be...You have for many times told that a Brahmin is not because of his lineage but due to the knowledge, wisdom and virtues that are in his posession. Now tell me why would the Brahmins oppose the move? Why is that they are against devotees praising God in Tamil Thevaram.

Thevaram is a collection of songs in praise of Shiva...

When Sankaracharya Swamigal reinforced that Brahmins way of life, why is that nobody heeded to him? Do you the latest happenings in Kanchi Mutt? But for Karunanidhi both of the swamigal would have been savouring the delicacies served in Tamilnadu jails...

Before the advent of Macaulay's education, majority of the doctors, administrators, engineers were all non-brahmins. Now I am not trying to say that Brahmins cannot aspire for these professions. After the new sysem of education got introduced, people who practiced knowledge acquisition through practice and observation were relegated to the periphery...better they totally denied to practice what they were doing for generations...Simply because they were practicing knowledge acquisition in a different form they could not adapt to the new requirements of cramming.

Also when others are ok to let Brahmins into other professions why do they oppose, in Tamilnadu, others to enter into their domain?

Re: # 291
Who needs planted royalty to tell THIS to the believers? The oneness of God was pronounced not 1400 years ago, but much before that.

Too bad, you got the news now; but it's never too late.

Shanti.

Re: # 281
Red-flagged? I'm sure that was done by those who 'know not what they do'.

If this is from the man I'm hinting at, he ought to be man enough to say that it is him!

If this is a belated reaction of the editors, what can I say? I've already said enough to them.

If this is done by someone who is sick and tired of being corrected, I say,"The best is yet to come".

Peace to the shattered.

Re: # 344

How is it a Strawman?

Did you not write this?

"Muslims would have become a formidable force in India politically if this division didn't fragment them into 3"

I am assuming the entire thing was a grand white conspiracy against "coloreds" then?

Re: # 268
I read Freud (actaully a sexist Fraud) when I was (shhh...) still suffering from P-envy. But that was when I was under ten years old!

Re: # 341

Yar BJ ok. While you have failed to impugn the facts you so liberally call fiction, we all know that even your fiction is plagiarized. The King of Plagiarism is mortally estopped from accusing others of misconduct- especially on the basis of flimsy evidence and prejudice.

Re: # 248

Please correct that to read: "...was shown the doorknob."

PS: Now let me try the condo-zamin, as you suggested. Never realised what a dual-purpose REAL THING it is!

Re: # 227
Sorry, surgeon Cheema, I did not read this blasphemous interact! So is THIS what makes Razi great in your eyes? One fool misleads a hundred.

Again, read the Qur'an translation that I recommend to see for yourself if you need guidance (if!).

I always give full credit to the devil, and have noticed with great joy that you've FINALLY learnt to spell Qur'an right! Hallelujah--no wait, al-hamdu lilah!

Doctors are an intelligent lot I think.

Peace.

Re: # 226
I'm afraid Mr. Cheema, if you listen to Mr. Hawkins explain who and what God is, beware that scientists are the greatest secret believers in God, yet they never admit so in public out of fear of being laughed at. But it doesn't matter; guess who will get the last laugh?

When you finally grow up (one does utter nonsense in the teens), the reality of things will dawn upon you. For now, I must leave you alone with your resident demons.

Peace.
PS: I know so many Cheemas; we will connect somewhere someday! Until then, more peace...

Re: # 346
Guru...
Babasaheb was not so much of a people leader like Mayawati. He was not a visionary like Kanshiram. He could have reached out to even leaders like Sawarkar who were working for abolishing casticism. He did not open any educational institutions or built any cooperatives for Harijans.

Ans: agree...
Actually, Babasaheb was the tool used by Congress to weaken RSS...He was not a popular leader like Babu Jagajivan Ram or Kanshiram....

Contd...
Political voice does not empower people, education does...

I mean empoverished Gulf Land without oil.

Few hints for compulsions:

When did Shah of Iran grabbed the throne?

11th of Sept 1973, crippling railway strike led to Pokharan I.

Who killed Mujib? Nehru, Patel and Indira feared becoming Salvador. Indira used to complain about hidden hand whose birth was on the eastern side of Atlantic in 1947.

# masadi
Religion,idealogy and democracy etc. is a fodder used by Machavillian pundits to sedate or inflame the masses to achieve certain objectives,sometimes they succed and sometimes they dont.Sometimes thier objectives are selfserving and sometimes they are noble(Machavillians are capable of doing good).Now lets come to Pakistan.Without being pedantic or googling unnecessary details one can ask a simple question,what was the need for pakistan?Was it religion or something else?
If you study the history objectively,that you cannot do without being detached from it,you will draw the conclusion that underlying currents for every religion,idealogy and war etc.were economic.The creation of pakistan is no exception,religion was a tool to mobblize the masses.Now the question is,has pakistan served the purpose?Yes it has. but what about the indian muslims?Too bad its not good for them.But thier lot would not have changed even if there was no partition. sorry i can not type for too long.

Re: # 312
Masadi...

The colonials did not resist the partition of India rather they drew the map that was most beneficial for them, as they did in the ME, where they kept countries busy with each other and used Pakistan. Jinnah was facilitator of the colonial plan, and he was the public face of the colonial game in India- how hard is that for you to understand? A secular person evoking religious identity for the purpose of seperation- knowing nothing about either religion or the pulse of the people who had no part in the partition except through religiously invoked hatred by these elite.

Ans: Again blaming British!!!!! Were Brits involved during 1971 partition of Pakistan?
What Jinnah had done was good for muslims. The other alternative available for muslims was little difficult. Work hard and bridge the gap with upper caste Hindus/Parsees...Jinnah had taken the safest route.
In undevided India, muslims were far backward in education and related professional fields (teacher,professor,doctor, engineer,lawyear,scientist...). For British, muslims were never threat (numerically Hindus were more; so were the intellectually).Why British will discriminate against muslims?
Coming back to political voice, it would not have ensured quality of life for muslims in undevided India....
In Tamilnadu, more than 67% seats are reserved (now Karunanidhi included Muslims and Christians) to suppress Tamil brahmins...That failed ...
Hitler had tried to eliminate German jews...They (jews) migrated to USA and made the place most advanced in all sectors (media, banking, technology,medical science, physical science, agriculture....)...

Re: # 322 Ekbhai,

I was goading Manto not to quote Babasaheb for whom I respect. But we should keep in mind that he was tallest among the leader who were job seekers under British rule which included many in Congress, except Gandhi, Subhash and other revolutionary with socialist types. Job seeking leaders are needed and have there space. But the foundation is laid and organization is built by the spiritual, inspirational leaders such as Gandhi and Subhash. MAJ was a super job seeker. When British brought MAJ and Babasaheb on their side of the table, congress leadership panicked. Compulsions they felt never came on the pages of Times of India. World war II was good for India ... it exhausted British and they left in a haste. If they had stayed a decade longer India would look like Gulf land.

Babasaheb was not so much of a people leader like Mayawati. He was not a visionary like Kanshiram. He could have reached out to even leaders like Sawarkar who were working for abolishing casticism. He did not open any educational institutions or built any cooperatives for Harijans. On day to day basis he could not relate to them. I do not fault him so much because of his long stay in west and marriage (second marriage to saraswat bramhin) he had very less in common with them. A milder version of MAJ. I hate to talk about other people esp dead ones. He was a great man given the odds he faced. Period. But keep it in mind that India is functional democracy because it has Dharmic culture. His greatest contribution was choosing a Dharmic Panth over Abrahmic religion. I think some where even Babasaheb wrote that his decision was based on which among the choices does not alienate Harijans from their neighbor, which does not make them give up their language, script and culture, which does not make rever distant land and prophet. I can respect the prophet but not at the expense of my mom and dad.

In #344 read "otherwise they could have just as readily used that.."

as "otherwise they would have just as readily used that.."

Manto writes "Now I understand why that horrible Hindu Majumdar puts up (PBUH) next to Jinnah's name. The whole thing was a grand anti-Muslim conspiracy just like the Hizb-e-Tahrir claims."

Classic use of the straw man fallacy. When stumped by his opponents genuine arguments, he "invents" an alien argument, attributes it to me so he can dismantle the argument of his own creation and muddy my real arguments. It was not an "anti-Muslim conspiracy" as it was a "pro-colonial conspiracy"- Muslims just happened to be at the receiving end whose religion was exploited to fragment India...they couldn't use Hinduism for that purpose because of the Hindu association with India as a nation, otherwise they could have just as readily used that.....

In #342 read "What is fictitious in your BS is your cheerleading for anil " as

What is fictitious is your BS in your cheerleading for anil

Manto writes "The fact is that you've failed to answer the basic question asked by HP in his post. I suggest you read and learn from it."

No need to return to your dishonest lying self if you have been stumped by my arguments. No question raised by HP in his post has been left unanswered by me. The new order that emerged, partners to which the British were- that of US hegemony used Pakistan and is still using it- that was the least of the questions that needed addressing because it is so obvious. His other questions regarding further division by ethnicity etc were comprehensively answered by me. What escapes you in all this is the fact that HP acknowledges that the colonials extrated mileage out of this division, it was a division granted not gained through struggle, in ohter words the country "was given". Except for the details of the methodology of division and his confusion that I was claiming that the "purpose" was primarily to weaken the Muslim political strength, when I wasnt claiming that as the primary motive is the only difference. In the broader picture he agrees more with me than with you. What is fictitious in your BS is your cheerleading for anil who claims that there was no such thing as British colonization, it was merely an extension of Mughal rule with white faces....and you called that a great post! Go figure.....

[Dear Masadi,
That is an interesting bit of fiction.]

Pay attention Masadi miaN. The interactor who said that has left a long track record of creative fiction behind him.

"colonization from a distance, for that purpose this division using MAJ as the public face, as history has shown, worked out quite well for them. Muslims would have become a formidable force in India politically if this division didn't fragment them into 3, and considering how they treated the Muslims vis-à-vis the Hindus of India to ferment conflict"

Now I understand why that horrible Hindu Majumdar puts up (PBUH) next to Jinnah's name. The whole thing was a grand anti-Muslim conspiracy just like the Hizb-e-Tahrir claims.

Dear Masadi,

No need to resort to abuse because you can't defend your thesis. Your lack of substance is availabe in that you've not even established a motive or gain let alone anything concrete to base it on. As for your freudian slip, it is not my interpretation that matters but your own.

Your failure to answer the simple question of what the British have gotten out of this (given that you've admitted that their hands were being twisted by the new imperial power) proves what I am saying? Or is there a grand western elite that is at work both in the US and UK and other "assorted" countries of Western imperialism?

The fact is that you've failed to answer the basic question asked by HP in his post. I suggest you read and learn from it.

Re: # 332; Masadi

Without agreeing with every word in your post, and reserving the right to differ with you at times on certain matters, your explanation is the one I find closest to my own on the subject in question.

Cheers.

In #335 read "I didn't know you were not practicing "shrinkery" as

"I didn't know you were now practicing "shrinkery"

By the way that was another Freudian Slip, Manto's new terminology for "typo"

now I don't have time left for your BS....later...

Manto writes "That is an interesting bit of fiction."

What it is is stumping your a$$ and showing the true face of your "god", MAJ, it also shows your inability to counter my arguments with anything substantial.

Regarding the "freudian" slip, I didn't know you were not practicing "shrinkery", when did you give up your law diploma to become a psychologist? By the way Allah has been used by people of many faiths to invent myths, we have the hadith among Muslims, the assorted books of the Holy Babble and so on, even though I was referring to that other agent of the colonials, the Allama who became a mass appeal "Islamic" mullah overnight....

Dear Masadi,

That is an interesting bit of fiction.

In my view ... it is the a fallacy in excess of Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc. Now my knowledge of latin is rather poor but in your theory it is Propter Hoc Ergo Post Hoc.

Given your magical thinking routine, how would you interpret your freudian slip of Allah as the myth creator?

In #332 read "and the Allah as the myth creator and legitimizer."

"and the Allama (meaning Iqbal) as the myth creator and legitimizer."

HP writes "If the goal was to fragment India, they could have easily done that by using the multiple sub-nationalities that lived in the undivided India. What was the need to put together another country with diverse sub nationalities like Pakistan when they could have possibly had just the NWFP, Sindh, Bengal and Punjab as separate countries? "


Actually I have not jumped the gun, I thought through this quite carefully unlike Manto who has "jumped the gun" in cheerleading for HP's piece that has several holes. The first and foremost thing that needs to be recognized is that the British divided India into three parts for all intents and purposes, Bengal whose "Muslim identity" Jinnah had forgotten was set up for further division from Pakistan down the road. Why further division were not attempted of NWFP, Sindh and Punjab was i) because given their size and dependency they would have rejoined the union down the road making this entire division an exercise in futility. Their size and strength within a larger nation state could be controlled to prevent expulsion, where the size was larger as in Bengal, we know what happened therefore I claim it was setup for division from day one. Further (ii) if these ethnicities were granted "independence" what prevented the other many ethnicities from demanding their own independence as well. Have you thought that one out? The British might be dimwits but they are not that stupid. Now, the two major divisions in India, whom the British had been playing against each other, were the Hindus and the Muslims and the difference between the two, religion was used, with Jinnah as its public face and the Allah as the myth creator and legitimizer. What the British wanted was a viable state, large enough to cause trouble to India, rife with internal problems, where the ruling elite, the feudals could maintain the status quo dangling the threat of India, where the military would warp, faced by an external enemy, to what it became, one that could be used by it - as it was. The British were under tremendous pressure to decolonize by the US, whose new order (new window dressing same old colonization through a distance and implicitly through institutions) was emerging. These divisions given the Indian context are similar in principle to the divisions that took place in the ME. Regarding why a similar religion Pakistan was created and not different religion entities as in some countries of the ME, because that would defeat the whole purpose of creating a nation based on the religious identity- the religious difference with India was exploited not intra-country religious difference- have they not created a "uniform religion" country in the ME as well for ulterior motive, i.e. Israel?

Like I said I have thought through this, have not jumped the gun, and the arguments are sound. By the way I did not mention that the division was for the supreme purpose of fragmenting Muslim political clout, that was an added benefit, their division was to facilitate for themselves (the new order of the US in which they are partners) colonization from a distance, for that purpose this division using MAJ as the public face, as history has shown, worked out quite well for them. Muslims would have become a formidable force in India politically if this division didn't fragment them into 3, and considering how they treated the Muslims vis-à-vis the Hindus of India to ferment conflict, how they have acted in the ME etc, all evidence would suggest that this added benefit was sought by them as well.

than

HP, Anil and Majumdar,

Excellent posts. I hope Masadi comes up with a fruitful response (which I am sure he is capable of) then his routine knee jerks.

HP sain,

Re: 323

Well-written. This business of "Brits divided us b4 they left" is a way of avoiding blame for our own karnamey. Rather than admit our own unwillingness to make the kind of compromises/adjustments to stay together blame the Brits for dividing us.

Regards

HP Mian:

Here are my few words to add:

Colonialism was essential to the industrialization of European economies in those days. At its core was the urgent need to secure raw materials for economic engines of the Europe. Colonialists / imperialists used both their force and their religion to secure “trading posts� and the supply chain both inland and on-seas globally.

This trading nature of colonialism, and extended on-land and at-sea supply chain triggered development of trading posts all over the world. These trading posts became highly prosperous; entirely all prosperity was always brought home to the Europe. Inter-colony trade was shady, involved slave-trade, drug trade etc., all other trade was mainly with the mother country. All other legitimate trade between colonies was taxed by the mother country.

“No Taxation without Representation� was the first organized opposition to the colonialism. Boston tea party is something we have all read about. Why American colonies pay tax to the crown in England to bring tea from India was the heart of the issue.

Boer war was another. In both cases European settlers did not want to be burden with taxes on their consumption to mother country or countries.

It is more accurate that imperialism more than colonialism came to Asia, shortly after the trade had started, as traders met fierce resistance from the native people, culture and civilization.

East India Company traders and enforcers used Mogul techniques to establish themselves. Even their feudal system was re-institutionalized through zamindari and royatwari as means of revenue collection, and appointment of native subedars and maharajas was no different than Mogul approach. Except that the agent was either and an British or a French (in case of French colonies).

Opposition caused East India Company to be replaced by direct rule. Even Karl Marx reported that this change was inevitable. One may not be wrong that only a pretext was being searched, which Indians provided it in 1857.

Role of religion in those days, as I see was considered to accord privilege.

Missionaries in those days were not on the “deliverance� mission. Islam had already provided an example, and the British went on to perpetuate the system of reward and punishment that Moguls had successfully used to. They too created an Anglo-Indian class.

India had a very unique position. It was here Islam’s march was halted, and as was the halt of European imperialism with the grant of independence to India.

Many factors had convinced the British that after the world war II their days in India were numbered. As imperialists they had realized the benefit of trading with “India� as single trading block. East India Commpany remains the most successful venture for its shareholders.

Divide and conquer no doubt was central doctrine only while they ruled and could be rulers. I am not sure if there was much to be received by the imperialists through division after they leave. Reasons for creating state of Israel are quite different, than creation of Pakistan.

Many new courses were charted in 1930 – 1940s in India-British relationship. Treatment of India was very different than the treatment of middle east where, in true colonial spirit need was to secure raw material – oil, like in Africa.

Massaddi Mian is wrong on both counts when he asserts that weakening of Indian Muslims as central for the British, and when he terms the Brits as colonials in India.

British Empire emulated imperial Mogul empire to succeed in India. However, there was one major difference that British indeed built education and trade in India.

Aurangzeb was the principal reason to weaken Indian Muslim position. I can share my reasons, but later.

British happened to be the force to shake the last domino of the Mogul empire many years later. They had beaten the French, the other competing European empire builders, elsewhere.

Sir Sayyed indeed tried to bring in, education and trade that the British had introduced into Muslim India. I do not know if you are aware, Benares Hindu University was formed after the formation of Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) and was patterned on AMU. Otherwise Muslims from Punjab and NWFP were happy to be soldiers and feudals that they had been during Mogul period.

Congress forced the hand to quickly get over with the process of Independence. Jinnah did not have any better plan than TNT to wait for. He was a committed TNTist and religionist by that time.

Although, I highly doubt, that as smart and secular that he was, he must have known TNT would be bankrupt as policy. It was at best theory as symbolized in its name.

Real issue was for Muslims to accept a new role in post independent India, where they can no longer be the ruler of India. To some extent this turmoil still continues in Pakistan, although other religion is not an issue, identity is.

British wanted to leave when it became obvious to them that it was no longer viable for them to rule India.

Jinnah-Gandhi-Nehru & Co. were ready buyers for this trading of places. Brits were quite eager to trade with the minimum bloodshed on their watch.

They negotiated a great package for the sterling debt they had owed to India, to pay back through selling back British goods and services. Commonwealth indeed was a precursor of global economy in those days.

I also can debunk that elitism is not an issue, and has never been an issue. It has always existed among humans and will continue to exist for a long time due to human nature and dynamics that allow some to excel more than the others.

Re: # 326

i WILL be back if you call again saab. happy life for now saab

Re: # 311

thank you masadi saab you didn't even curse me once saab last 3/4 interacts. that is good saab. like i said you are a very clever man saab and we do love you. and don't get upset by idiots saab.

Regards

Peon of the West

Re: # 323

HP my dear, the way I understand it, the colonials really did not set out to fragment India (even less so along to fragment it along religious lines). Their original objective was to guard their own commercial interests (by avoiding local taxes, etc.) However, those people from East India Company who were locally in charge – because of the six-month or so time gap between messages crossing back and forth from England, felt enabled to make a lot of “on the spot� decisions which they understood that the parent company (and country) would not approve of but would be unable to do much about after the fact. They saw opportunities to advance Britain’s commercial interests by taking advantage of the numerous fault lines that existed, while simultaneously making themselves VERY rich.

It went like this.

There were a LOT of local rulers. These folks had no qualms of conscience taking help of the British to win over OTHER local rulers. When the (superior and better trained British forces) would win against the adversary, whoever those may be, the “winning� party would hand over a part of the land to the British as reward. The local East India Company officials would take home a substantial amount of cash, also the “winner� would hand over a LOT of precious gifts further enriching them and the Company would be guaranteed a steady source of revenue because it could impose a tax on the ryots of that land. The “winning� rulers did not think far enough (or did not care to think far enough) that eventually, their turn will come too, as it certainly did.

It was a long-term habit. We were a fractious people and perhaps still are.

Even as late as the second half of twentieth century, what was Pakistan’s accord with China on dividing Kashmir – if not just another example of that same old “come side with me in my tiff with my neighbor and I hand over a piece of our land to you!� mentality?!

#302 Posted by Eklavya on March 26, 2008 4:11:13 am

I dont know coz I dont read romair :(

#304 Posted by masadi

“The "facts" of history show that the colonials were more than happy to fragment India, reduce the political clout of the Muslims of India and work with the elites in Pakistan to get us to where we are at.�

This is just an opinion and especially when you say that the purpose of the exercise was to “reduce the political clout of the Muslims in India�. I can understand that the colonialist had some special interest in fragmenting India but reducing this fragmentation effort to just Muslims, fails to meet any logical criteria.

If the goal was to fragment India, they could have easily done that by using the multiple sub-nationalities that lived in the undivided India. What was the need to put together another country with diverse sub nationalities like Pakistan when they could have possibly had just the NWFP, Sindh, Bengal and Punjab as separate countries? Now if they had done that the idea of fragmentation would have made much more sense. Do you agree with that?

The Pakistan idea was sold to the smaller provinces in India by Muslim League by promising them some sort of autonomy which was more than what was offered in the 1935 India act. The Pak resolution of 1940 never called for one Pakistan, it suggested autonomy to Muslim Majority provinces that happened to be on the east and west flank of India.

The 1940 resolution as it was then, would have created several states and as we know that kind of fragmentation would have been whole lot better than creating just one country. All ingredients for this kind of fragmentation were very much visible just before the partition. Bacha Khan in NWFP wanted his own country; Sindhi GM Syed and Somro were more interested in their own country. The Bengali leadership too would have liked that idea. Baloch always wanted to be a separate country. To extend it even further, let’s take the cultural divide that existed in South and North India could have been exploited too.

I think there were several possibilities that existed at that time. Why the colonialists did not explore those possibilities and went after the most difficult proposition of dividing India on the religious grounds?

Taking the ME route of early 20th century would have meant putting together people of different faiths and sects in one geographical entity to keep that country permanently at the edge of disaster, like Lebanon and Iraq! Following your line of reasoning, we find that what Brits did was exactly opposite when they supported Pakistan as you claim, where people overwhelmingly had one faith.

In fact, the solution in the ME too was not some premeditated solution. The British created some artificial countries when all they were trying to do was to destroy the Turkish Empire. It was convenient at that time to create Syria, Iraq and Lebanon, rather than have one Arab country out of the Turkish control.

To wit: If Jinnah was part of the British scheme, then there is no doubt that the Congress leadership especially Gandhi and Nehru were part of the Plan too. Without Gandhi-Nehru consent there was no hope for an independent Pakistan. What about the communists who supported Pakistan, were they part of the conspiracy too?

I think you are jumping the gun here and fail to see the other side of your argument. Though I wouldn’t doubt that some bright British might have seen some opportunities in Pakistan but then they were not the imperialist power after the 2WW.

guru bhai, haven't followed this board recently, but I hope you are NOT impugning Baba Sahib's reputatation by any means. That would be so illogical and unfair, given that Gandhi (and Nehru) always knew what a privilege it was to have Baba Sahib around.

guru brother, after what Baba Sahib and the people he identitifed with the most had been put through for centuries and centuries, whatever frustration he showed, whatever words he used, were the very LEAST he could have done.

Gandhi fully understood that, and at the end of the day, Baba Sahib too recognized what Gandhi brought to the table.

---------

PLEASE, let's not foolishly sully the names of the tallest among us in the last few hundred years, whatever our specific disagreements over details may be. Disagreements are natural, disrespect is regrettable.

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

If I misunderstood, I apologize. I just skimmed through some posts.

Re: # 319 Yes! I agree. That was the whole point, what these idiots gathered in one hour from their casual reading using their common sense was missed by the learned chattering BA(Hon)s. BTW the friend developed software for hedge funds raking millions. Guess it pays for being super idiot.

Sticking to the subject. Manto should quote people other than Ambedkar while talking about MAJ or Gandhi. Ideally people should not talk about individual personalities but the social under currents and whether as individuals or group can we overpower them. I guess that is what one should get from reading social sciences, economics or humanities. Masadi spells out these currents much better than others.

More Prof Bose on Ambedkar.

Ambedkar was not from a poor Dalit family; his father was in the British army. The Maharaja of Baroda had financed his education both in Bombay University and in the USA and London. Although he was the representative of only the Mahar community in Maharashtra and unknown in the rest of India, he was sent to London to join the roundtable conference as the representative of the entire backward castes and tribals of India.

The British had the design to create Pakistan, Khalistan of Tara Singh, Dalitstans of Ambedkar and a number of tribal homelands so that there would not be any united India. That was the reason Gandhiji refused to go along with that conference.

Right till 1946, Ambedkar was a vehement opponent of the freedom movement. He claimed with pride that he was the representative of the people who had conquered India for the British. He proclaimed that the freedom movement was a sham, a ruse, and Gandhiji was an agent to perpetuate the Nazi-like suppression of the masses, and the British Viceroy was the saviour of the depressed classes.

In 1941, Dr Ambedkar was appointed as a member of the defence advisory committee of the Viceroy to help the British war efforts against Japan, when Rashbehari Bose and Mohan Singh had already founded the Azad Hind Fauz in Tokyo and were waiting for Netaji to arrive.

In 1942, when people of India were facing bullets from the British, Ambedkar was enjoying a comfortable life as the labour adviser to the Viceroy. Even in April 1946, Ambedkar was telling the Viceroy, Lord Wavell: “If India became independent, it would be one of the greatest disasters that could happen.�

We should ask for the source of finance of Ambedkar so that he could pay Rs 13,000 every month, a great lot of money in those days, to MN Roy since 1936.

As chairman of the drafting committee of the Constitution of free India, Ambedkar supported every suggestion of the British officers. On 6 September, 1949 in the Constituent Assembly, he disregarded the objections of Kuladhar Chaliha and Rohini Choudhury of Assam to make the tribal areas as separate administrative units, the mechanism of which was drafted by a British missionary, Rev Nicholas Roy, so that the Christian missionaries could convert the tribal population en masse. The result is what we are witnessing today in the north-eastern states.

Masadi miaN,

Congratulations on getting your book published!

guruji, EE/CS PHD's are idiots...as a generic class of people. thought I mention that to you at the outset. and frankly blaming others for your your own problems is the height of stupidity. maybe a seminar on that in the EE/CS/BS PHD studies would help

Masadi is probably the only one bringing light to this chowk. May be too bright for many. Masadi, brother thanx for the light but be little lite on elite.

Most of the educated Indians except Gandhi, Subhash Chandra and revolutionary ones were job seekers or salariats. What Masadi is saying was even observed by a Brazilian colleague in Murrey Hill NJ without knowing much about Indian History. He had perused for an hour Midnight's Children by Salman Rushdie for an hour. He suspected that MAJ and to some extent Ambedkar were agents of British. At that time I did not know much about MAJ or Ambedkar. In last 20 years how the world events have been unfolding it seems Brazilian EE/CS PhD friend seem to be right. British could not carve out another Dalitisthan but they threatened Congress leadership using Harijan card in many ways. MAJ had turned British agent when he retired to England in 1931.

Instead of blaming this person or that person the next generation should learn how few can manipulate and exploit many. What MCaulay started 150 years back brought us here where we can not be sure about our brothers, cousins and neighbors .... every one looks paraya.

Let more erudite Prof Basu do the talking. Hope it helps in bringing people together.


Affirmative action-I

Experiments In The Former Soviet Union, Japan & America

By Dipak Basu

The author is Professor in International Economics, Nagasaki University

“If our political progress is to be real, the underdogs of our society must be helped to become men� (Rabindranath Tagore, Letters from Russia)

The debate on affirmative action in India tends to drag and isn’t always geared to the desired objective: creation of equality of opportunity. As with secularism, the reservation system in India has a different political aim ~ to make the system more unequal than what it is.

Secularism, far from making the state independent of religion, is intended to provide special privileges to certain religious groups. Similarly, the affirmative system is politically designed to provide restricted, not equal, rights to some chosen people.

The policy was perhaps started in India by Lord Curzon in 1905 by banning the employment of Hindu Bengalis in government services. The official argument was that they were too advanced and others, particularly Muslims, would be deprived of job opportunities. Later it was extended to the military services by giving preferential treatment to Muslims and Sikhs who were branded as martial races.

Divide population

Reservations in government jobs were introduced in 1918 in Mysore in favour of a number of castes and communities that had little representation in the administration. In 1909 and in 1919 the system was introduced for the Muslims in British India. In 1935, political reasons prompted the government to provide job reservation for the backward castes.

The real idea was to divide the population of India into several warring groups along religious, ethnic and caste lines by granting special rights so that India of the future would be divided and weak. A number of prominent politicians had acted as agents of the Raj to implement that line of action. Among them was BR Ambedkar. Although today he is regarded as a founding father of the nation, the writer of the Constitution and the cult figure of the backward castes with four universities named after him, he took no part in the freedom movement. Instead, like EVR Periyarer of Tamil Nadu, CP Ramaswamy Aiyar of Kerala, Jinnah and Mohammed Iqbal, he was a staunch loyalist of the empire, hand-in-glove with the British to divide India along caste, religion and tribal lines. The followers of the same person today include the Communists who, forgetting the essentials of the Marx-Lenin ideology, are supporting job reservation along caste and religious lines.

Equality of opportunity is the basis of a true democracy and as such affirmative action is required to equalise opportunities among people who are endowed differently. Even in the USA, affirmative action was promoted first by President Lyndon Johnson in 1974 to promote American blacks, who were deprived of most opportunities. However, it was not a success. The countries where it was most successful are Japan, the former Soviet Union and other former socialist countries of East Europe along with Cuba and Vietnam. India should take a lesson from them to implement a proper policy on affirmative action.

The success of the Soviet society regarding affirmative action was observed by Rabindranath Tagore, who wrote: “Throughout the ages, civilised communities have contained groups of nameless people. They toil most, yet theirs is the largest measure of indignity. They are deprived of everything that makes life worth living. I had often thought about them, but came to the conclusion that there was no help for them... In Russia at last. Whichever way I look I am filled with wonder. From top to bottom they are rousing everyone up without distinction�.

Immediately after the revolution, Lenin proclaimed the affirmative action known as korenizatsiia to provide affirmative preferences for non-Russians, backward ethnic groups and poor Russians. To gain the support of the non-Russian, who were largely illiterate except in Georgia and Armenia, a Sovietization in three phases was developed. In the first phase, the respective cultures were promoted. This aroused their national conscience. This eventually led to the second phase which was rapprochement and finally to the third phase which was merger. Non-Russians were awarded their own administrative territories and accorded preference in educational and promotion policies. This policy led to the creation of massive educational facilities in the republics of the backward people, employment for the representatives of the ethnic intelligentsia, foundation of republican academies of science and research centres supporting ethnic unions of writers, painters and film-makers. The policy
was applied uniformly to create elites, which, like their culture, would be national in form, but with the same content in all units of the union.

However, there was no fixed quota in admissions to the educational establishments or in jobs. Instead, education was made free at all stages and compulsory up to certain ages depending on their ethnic background. Every qualified student was entitled to scholarship to cover his or her costs of maintenance. Education was taken to the people where they lived. Even mobile schools and libraries were established for the nomadic populations of central Asia. A certain number of students from the backward areas of the Soviet Union was taken to the very best universities and institutes of higher learning. They got separate training so that they could compete effectively with the more advanced Russian students.

Due to this social engineering, within two decades the Soviet Union had eradicated illiteracy and had the best educated population in the world. It wasn’t a reservation system for the backward people, but completely free education and massive extension of education. Both the Soviet Union and Japan improved the lot of the totally uneducated without any formal reservation or quota system but through compulsory free education on a massive scale.

Japanese system

The guiding principle of the Japanese system of education is uniformity, conformity and integration. There is no room for special rights or reservations in that regimented system, which is available equally for everyone.

In the USA, the term affirmative action was first used in the Executive Order 11246, issued by President Johnson. The order called on federal government contractors to “take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, colour, or national origin.� However, those who were already educated or advanced financially among the blacks or Hispanics, equivalent to the creamy layers in India, got the benefits. Thus, the affirmative action could not change the basic nature of the most unequal society. There was considerable opposition to the system in the days of Reagan. Today, nearly 26 per cent of the population is functionally illiterate. Social mobility is on the decline. There is widespread homelessness and poverty among the blacks and Hispanics. In a word, affirmative action hasn’t changed the characteristics of American society.

#316
masadi is enjoying his stay in the halfway house.

masadi yaar, US Elite called, they want you to head up the Alternative History department at a Gov't College in Lala Musa. I told them that you will be perfect for it. Pay is a little less than what you make now, but you get to take home all the stationary that is in your desk. what say you pal?

Re: # 294

Massaddi Mian:

"...in furthering the cause of humanity, i.e. in public service...."

Hurling abuses is Massaddi Mian's public service. That public has to yourself and your mirror. Then you never knew what reality is, did you?

RE #312, reasoning with you is like reasoning with a "doorknob" (pardon me Hamid)...

later....

Re: # 312

Like I said I am not interested in discussing anything with you as you are incapable of opening your mind.

Manto writes "What your arguments essentially amount to is the fallacy that is called "Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc".

The opposite of doesn't mean it was part of the grand colonial plan..."

You need to learn your "logic" more carefully and not be like Ali Sina pasting definitions of fallicies whenever your opponent stumps you with their arguments. The colonials did not resist the partition of India rather they drew the map that was most beneficial for them, as they did in the ME, where they kept countries busy with each other and used Pakistan. Jinnah was facilitator of the colonial plan, and he was the public face of the colonial game in India- how hard is that for you to understand? A secular person evoking religious identity for the purpose of seperation- knowing nothing about either religion or the pulse of the people who had no part in the partition except through religiously invoked hatred by these elite.

Regarding my "armed struggle"- I am not in a position of power or leadership, if I was and followed through, knowingly or unknowingly, with the grand strategy of the colonials, I would be just as contemptable as Jinnah was. Comparing me to him in this argument is a "straw man fallacy", wherein stumped by your opponent's arguments you "invent" an argument, attribute it to your opponent and then dismantle it and declare victory.....that is the sum total of your "logic" and "knowledge"- your reasoning is quite pathetic....

In #310 read "will claiming to be for "peace"-"

as "while claiming to be for "peace"-

HP writes "Any army action or Martial Law could mean civil war in Pakistan. Now the US might love that but we still don’t know whether the Pak army as a unit would go for any US forced solution that might start the breakup of the army itself."

What I wrote does not imply that the US admits defeat in Pakistan. What I am looking at is the US fulfilling a "new" ulterior motive, that of Iran especially if they can get the Saudis to foot the bill in addition to the tax payers to make this another very short term recession, and breaking from the past by breaking up Pakistan rather than work with its military. Not only does it fuel the WOT and facilitate the Iranian adventure, it ensures this farce continues into the long term. WE know how jumpy these elite can get when what they desire conflicts with the desires of whoever they have used in the past, that would be the example of the current Iraq invasion, they didn't even let Blix finish his morning cereal before declaring a failed inspections of WMDs. I don't think the WOT will simmer come January, it will continue well into the next decade, and Pakistan or the mini Pakistan will remain at the center...I agree and have written earlier as well that a new martial law will not go easy with the people this time around, the civil war will be directed mostly towards the military- the US might coopt this and hand over Pakistan and its nukes to the mullah and his sympathisers for obvious reasons of causing "fasad" in the guise of a WOT will claiming to be for "peace"-

What your arguments essentially amount to is the fallacy that is called "Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc".

The opposite of doesn't mean it was part of the grand colonial plan. Simply a tendency to fit in everything in your zero-sum game doesn't make it true.

In any event let us not discuss things that you have no ability to comprehend. Go wage an armed struggle somewhere or else we might have to brand you an establishment stooge or worse... US Elite stooge.

Eki yaar, you are still beating the flat drum? Ever consider that the rest of the 5/6th of humanity has drawn parity between between their god and muslim god, regardless of what tampax types think? tampax's god is no better ro worse than the elephant riding a rat. and the tampax types have been unable to do anything about it.

Manto writes "The facts of history show something quite different actually. But then facts are never your forte. "

A cheap and shallow excuse in the typical "mullah" fashion it is for this reason that I call you the high priest of the church of maj. Facts mean nothing to the mullah, all that matters to him are worship, devotion and his narrow formulae.

If you can show me that Pakistan was obtained by mass armed struggle by the people after evicting the colonials, who would rather stay, like Vietnam for example or that Pakistan chose the path of non alignment thereafter, then and only then will facts not be on my side...

Re: # 304

Masadi
The "facts" of history show that the colonials were more than happy to fragment India, reduce the political clout of the Muslims of India and work with the elites in Pakistan to get us to where we are at.:)

I do so agree masadi.

Re: # 304

Masadi mian,

The facts of history show something quite different actually. But then facts are never your forte.

But as you say this is a futile discussion as you are not ready to open your mind to facts other than those divinely revealed to you.

Good day.

Manto quoting Ambedkar "Secondly, it forgets that Mr. Jinnah, who represents this ideological transformation, can never be suspected of being a tool in the hands of the British even by the worst of his enemies. "


Manto, I'll keep this as civil as possible given the discussion. First you provide a quotation which the way that the author puts it is his own opinion and has nothing to do with the "facts of history" as you claim. The "facts" of history show that the colonials were more than happy to fragment India, reduce the political clout of the Muslims of India and work with the elites in Pakistan to get us to where we are at. These are the glaring facts which no historian worth the name can deny. Given this basic premise when we note that Jinnah was a facilitator and not opposer to what transpired in the creation of Pakistan, as a thinking person I and many others are justified in considering him a tool (be it for his own ego) in the hands of the colonials.

Further, you can invoke as much "peace" as you want on him, the fact remains that in life (as in death given a just God), the person who is responsible, be it implicitly or indirectly for the butchering of so many (for his personal ego), will never find much peace.

I rest my case on this and do not want to rediscuss this over the entire board with you adding nothing and me repeating the same fact, well known facts in differnt words. Now, you go in peace.....

Ref: akcheema, Majumdar discussion

There are two statements... which I think sum it up. One by H V Hodson and the other by Dr. B R Ambedkar .. which might explain why Majumdar bhai and I use (PBUH) for Quaid-e-Azam Mahomed Ali Jinnah.

"One thing is certain, it was not for any venal motive that he changed. Not even his political enemies ever accused Jinnah of corruption or self seeking. He could be bought by no one and for no price. Nor was he in the least degree a weathercock, swinging in the wind of popularity or changing his politics to suit the chances of the time. He was a steadfast idealist, as well as a man of scrupulous honour." (Page 39- Great Divide)


and

From Pakistan or Partition of India by Dr. B R Ambedkar - the author of Indian constitution:

"Secondly, it forgets that Mr. Jinnah, who represents this ideological transformation, can never be suspected of being a tool in the hands of the British even by the worst of his enemies. ..... it is doubtful if there is a politician in India to whom the adjective incorruptible can be more fittingly applied. Anyone who knows what his relations with the British Government have been, will admit that he has always been their critic, if indeed, he has not been their adversary. No one can buy him. For it must be said to his credit that he has never been a soldier of fortune. The customary Hindu explanation fails to account for the ideological transformation of Mr. Jinnah."


Those who wish to abuse Jinnah, should go right ahead but one should not stop others from holding a point of view which is rooted in history.

"God of the Jews, Christians and Muslims is the same and they should get together and jointly rule over others unless the latter agree and learn to worship the same God."


vrv,

romair and his fellows have been arguing that from the rooftops ever since 9/11, and diehard semitics from even before that.

The king is just a little slow on the uptake.
---------------------

vrv

When a Muslim tells a non-Muslim that 'we all worship the same God,' the non-Muslim, if he or she understands any theology, should run like hell (unless he or she prefers other options that I do not recommend).

This is how the argument goes:

We all worship the same God.

That God sent his last and most up-to-date and best preserved message,

in the form of the Quran, through Prophet Muhammad,

so all of mankind may now follow Islam alone, unless they have closed hearts or out of deliberate mischief choose to ignore that one God's instructions,

in which case they should be allowed to live on under certain conditions.

Re: # 300

masadi saab, we all love you saab not just kulharee

A new ilog has been posted

----end of public service message---

Re: # 298

sorry sir masaddi saab

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

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

An important point majumdar brought up in response to my ilog on Saminakhan stating that one of my gallery items was inappropriate because it was a scanned newspaper clipping:

majumdar writes "But it didn't seem to me that Saminakhan was encouraging censorship of your article"

Masadi: Yes she was. She was advocating "self censorship" by me by stating that it was out of place and inappropriate, so I should refrain from making such gallery postings in the future. This is similar to what Musharraf advocates when he calls for a "responsible" (i.e. self censoring according to the parameters of the Pakistan Army/US), media....


----End of public-service message -----

self fulfilment

anil writes "Please learn the difference between "public service" and "self-service". "

Some people find self-fulillment and self service in furthering the cause of humanity, i.e. in public service....now get off my goddamned case you miserable punk...

Re: # 280

Massaddi Mian:

"... ----end of public service message---- ..."

You made a mistake. It should have been
"----end of self-serving message----"

Please learn the difference between "public service" and "self-service".

Re: # 290 [NOTICE:
Let the populace know that Mr. Cheema has not been annointed by any religious authority, nor authorised to speak on the subject.]

AND No: 288 [Momins please take note of this blasphemy.]

Tahir sahib, blasphemy IS 'Kufr'; according to YOUR statement, tahmed has committed blasphemy (Kufr); the committer of 'Kufr' is "Kafir".

You have just annointed every red-blooded Muslim in the land for the job sir; we must perform our religious duty........







Cheers

Saudi king Abd ul-Lah said this yesterday:

"The idea is to ask representatives of all monotheistic religions to sit together with their brothers in faith and sincerity to all religions as we all believe in the SAME God,"

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080325/ap_on_re_mi_ea/saudi_interfaith_dialogue

Though Pakistanis disgaree on UP abt this issue, the final word came from King himself who confirmed that the God of the Jews, Christians and Muslims is the same.

Thank u King.

Re: # 225
First admit that you practise what is mandatory in the Qur'an. You appear to prostrate before your own likes and dislikes.

NOTICE:
Let the populace know that Mr. Cheema has not been annointed by any religious authority, nor authorised to speak on the subject.

Re: # 288
[Mr. Tahband Battees (dhoti-32) or Tohmat Battees (charge-32) says:

"Religious God" is based not on the Quran but on a jahil culture".]

Allah maafi tauba!.... Kafir......Kafir.......Kafir.........
.......lynch him!....lynch him....lynch the bastard!....

Happy!...

and you are right about poets as well; just don't ever quote Iqbal in front of me again (include Ghalib as well; he came up with some crazy ideas whilst drunk; hang on, Iqbal too!).

Thanks and Khuda Hafiz to you sir. Some of us have to work.


Cheers

Re: # 224

Mr. Tahband Battees (dhoti-32) or Tohmat Battees (charge-32) says:

"Religious God" is based not on the Quran but on a jahil culture".

Momins please take note of this blasphemy.

Re: # 221
"All religions, Abrahamic or otherwise, are man-made. WE created the God(s) in OUR image not the other way around."

Stay away from rotten theories and wicked literature if you wish to have mental peace. Come to your senses doctor before the patients start complaining too!

The next thing you'll propose now is: daddy and mommy created every atom in your body!

Re: # 218
You forgot to impress us completely dear!

"Whatever good happens to thee is from God; and whatever evil befalls thee is from thyself."

Now who said THAT? Take a guess...

Re: # 214
"Only the erring follow the poets"

Who said that? The Sublime and the Subtle in Qur'an, of course!

Re: # 214
Funny! But it nicely explains away the mystery of those who follow a 'khalifa' who specialises in circumcision!

Did he really inspire you to take up chop-chop surgery?

Re: # 212
Kumar sahib, your ability to sum it up (burp) has been duly (another burp) noted.

Regards.
PS: burrrrrp....

Re: # 209
Dear man-with-a-brain-larger-than-my-own,

Did Prophet Muhammad stop after he purified worship and helped mankind to seek true guidance? It had to grow from personal to regional, and then global. He did not stop at just teaching everyone how to perform 'wudu'?

Man's faith is linked with living. Only you see politics as something seperate from faith.

In the meantime, you may continue to worship the golden calf of neo-con caliphs. Those who curse the rightly-guided ones are indeed unblessed to the core. Every once in a while, one must glance at the rear-view mirror.

I will see you again, won't I?

Re: # 199
Is this the Moth Smoke/Reluctant Fundamentalist man?
It is important to know what level of madness one is confronted with on CHOWK!

Regards.

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

Re: # 275; tahmed bhai
I reply as follows:

1 - There is a well-recognised difference b/w 'deism' and 'theism'; read up and tell me if I am wrong
2 - Believe in Father Christmas or the Tooth Fairy if it helps; doesn't mean they are real
3 - If you think that by rejecting 'unsuitable' aspects of Qur'an and Sunnah and selective reading etc., you can call yourself anything but Muslim; Ahmadis do the same when it comes to the concept of "khatm-e-nabuwwat"; otherwise the basic theology etc is the same as Sunni Islam; If they insist on being called Muslims, are you going to accept it at face value?
4 - The interacts I was referring to were over the last month; not just the last three that suited your needs; please don't apply your selective understanding to everything else in life as well
5 - Your assertion about the Swedes; that my friend is called the effects of Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD); there are also genetic explanations as well; they do it quietly (personal matter); not blow everyone else up til kingdom come as well
6 - If this "all-inclusive" concept of God you are into now (like Zeemax tried to distract me with Ghalib thinking I might not be able to deliver!), then what the hell does it matter anyway! "dar hashr da rakhiyay dil vich kiyun, jad mein hi naeen teh fair dar kaa'da"!

I am not trying to convert anyone, can you reassure Eklavya for me; he seems pretty concerned for some bizzarre reason. If we all kept our ideas to ourselves then what is the point of language in the first place.

Now stop sulking and be a good boy.........

Cheers

hamidm: So what about your claims that the Quran has verses which, if read aloud under a full moon turn normal men into bloodthirsty werewolves and normal women into lecherous she-devils? :-)

more seriously, if you have the "slightest mental problem" you dont need a reason to turn suicidal or homicial - in fact, the suicide rate is highest in places like Iceland and Sweden and Finland (no muslims there, no unwashed there). Same for homicide rates.

Re: # 263

tahmed,

... i never said accepting islam makes you a criminal - it makes most people a fool (doorknob) ...... but if you have the slightest mental problem it will turn you into a suicider or homicider ..... like any other virus it attacks the old, the young and the feeble (minded) ...... on the other hand, some of my best friends are muslims and seem to be doing fine (so far) ...... but i do keep a wary eye on them for any tell tale signs of the full blown disease .......

#264 anil sahib: It is true that the concept of God, as of everything else, is within our minds. But "supremacy" is not a relevant word for this. Kant solved this problem centuries ago when he said quite the same thing (i.e. that everything we perceive of conceive is an image in our minds), but that merely means we can never understand what he called the "ultimate reality". Which ties in with the concept of a Supreme Being tha our brains can no more comprehend than a dog can comprehend calculus (actually I had trouble with it too, but that is another story..)

akcheema #224/5/6: "YOUR concept of God is called "Deism";"
it has nothing to do with ritualistic religion of any kind; "

You are merely playing with words and labels here. If you want to get serious, then address the substance of what I have written.

"please get the concepts clear in your head first."

The fact that you dont agree with me does not mean that I am ignorant or confused.

Basically what you are saying in these three posts is that I have no right to have a view on the Quran that is different from yours. That I have no business conceiving of God as being something more than the maulvi concept of God (i.e. of a glorified thanedar) and still calling myself a muslim.

I am afraid this is as far as we can carry this discussion. Thanks.

Re: # 253

MASADI SAAB,

I am new here. Can you guide me please so I know what to do.
Regards

Peon of The West

#231 akcheema: "I think you are right; I give up!"

I told you I would read your posts and get back. Without giving me that chance, you jumped to join Hamidm in implying that I am not being reasonable.

If you wish to seriously discuss something, then you would need to give me the consideration I give you.

I will in any case now look at your posts now and see what you have to say and respond.

akcheema, help me explain this to my dear friend CA :)

There are people, lots of people, who actually believe in, hold on to, the basics of Islam, pillars and all. These people are as intelligent as any of us, if not more.

They just see things very differently.

What do the rest of us do?

Do we only fight with or ridicule each other? Or do we try to understand each other as much as possible, so we can minimize the need to fight?

And it's not fear, just a belief that unless absolutely necessary, fighting is just too wasteful.

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

Consider Anil ji's statement:

"Supremacy of mind not only over matter, but also over concept of God..."

Isn't it better to (1) understand that this statement is reaching too close to the limit of what tahmedji (or any Muslim) will accept or not accept..and (2) gently inform them of the same, in case, they missed it.

Do you think either anil ji (or any Hindu) or tahmedji (or any Muslim) will change their minds even a bit by this 'discussion' or such discussions? Most other discussions are far worse - wherein people simply abuse each other.

What can we get from those kinds of things?

ek lavya recited and believes in the 5 pillars of islam as the truth..ain't that right brother kaal? why the hedge bro?

Re: # 269; Eklavya bhai
"No fence sitting. I am just not blessed with faith."

You could have fooled me mate! Those who are "not blessed" tend to have an "even-handed" approach; you seem to be leaning more than the tower of Pisa!

Cheers

Cheema ji, agreed, the apparently simple, when implemented, can often have most 'unexpected' (unexpected by most people) results.

But there always seem to be some folks who know what results would actually follow, in most cases, and these are the people whose understanding really matters.

----------

No fence sitting. I am just not blessed with faith.

Re: # 259; Tahir bhai
"That 'P' thing is actually Pakistan-envy which makes many Islam-bashers on this site blush".

You obviously had not a clue what I was talking about.
Read a few chapters on Freudian psychology and you'd know.
I think we best drop it now.
Sydney Opera House; ah.. seen it from the outside only but must go watch something soon; note in diary....

Cheers

Re: # 260; Zeemax bhai

I take it you have seen my responses to your post No: 228.

"aur kissi sheyr ki tashreeh karvani hai to bataa dijye ga".

Like I said, if the responses are not adequate, its because I am busy with some projects and currently travelling a lot; will have more time in a month or so.
Cheers

Re: # 254; Eklavya Bhai
[""this simple concept makes religion a liberating force rather than an oppressive one."
Absolutely! I have repeatedly emphasized that point, since it is so different from what many outsiders seem to expect"]

Eklavya, just remember everything starts as simple; with the passage of time, inevitably, it becomes more and more complex. Give it some thought for me!

I have invited you to the fold of Islam many times! Make a decision as to which side your bread is buttered; this "fence-sitting" doesn't become you.



Cheers

"Supremacy of mind not only over matter, but also over concept of God...."

Most respectfully, anil ji, Sir, you are treading too close to dangerous grounds. Won't intrude more than saying just that :)

Re: # 263

Tahmed sahib:

Supremacy of mind not only over matter, but also over concept of God, itself is a state-of-mind, is my point. Sorry "over" got omitted.

You read Quran, and find it to make sense. Hamidm sahib reads, then RSS walas read, and when a suicide bomber / OBL reads he comes to the same conclusions. To all what they read, make perfectly good sense. This is precisely my point.

What allows various "minds" to read and make perfectly good sense(s), which are so different? The conclusion cannot escape us that it is "to each his / her own". Why? It is all about "mind".

Stephen Hawkins, famous quotation - "What is in God's Mind?" - puts "mind" supreme, albeit God's Mind, mind no doubt.

Difference between you and Hamidm sahib is that two of you talk at different wavelength. You talk spiritual; he talks existential / physical. For example, he questions winged angel, but not your message, as I see it.

Nothing that I have read from Hamidm sahib, in all these years, will point that he understands or has any patience to understand spiritual needs that can

anil sahib #256 Like everything else, religion too must indeed make sense in one's mind for it to be acceptable.

When I read the Quran, it makes perfectly good sense to me (notably, that the true nature of God is unknowable to man; that God has his reasons for "bad things" happening to good people that man cannot understand - and the Quran provides an interesting story on this too). And indeed hinduism and Taoism have something similar in their core message that also rings true to one's mind (e.g. The "Tao that can be named is not the true Tao").

HOWEVER: When I listen to the mullah concept of Islam, that makes no sense at all. Like I said, the mullah concept of God is that of a glorified thanedar whom you flatter (by singing his praises) and who in turn bestows favors.

In addition, when I read Hamidm's objections to Islam - i.e. accepting Islam means becoming a criminal - they makes no sense at all either.

#261 hamidm: "you are well on the way to being declared a kafir "

(yawn) That is not an argument either.

tahmed,

..... you better be careful - you are well on the way to being declared a kafir if you keep up with this selective interpretation of the koran and sunnah ...... that is worse than being called a doorknob ....

#258 Posted by tahir,

If you must proceed in that direction, wear an Imam-Zamin--whatever that is.

I'm sure you mean a condom by saying Imam-Zamin. No, Sir, if Mrs. Hamidm2 exists, she would be quite happy without one.

About his teenage daughters (if they exist) would certainly insist on the guy wearing one. Though I remember and respect Hamidm2's assertion once that how could I say such things about my 'Bhanji/bhateejis'? I won't. That was a fair demand by hamidm2.

Re: # 204

That 'P' thing is actually Pakistan-envy which makes many Islam-bashers on this site blush.

The Western idea of religion is flirtatious Greeko-Roman gods and goddesses, capitalism, communism, and many more silly 'isms'. Ah! Lenon, Marx, Mao and others.

Spend less time at the Sydney Opera House please.

Re: # 199
You don't appear to have much faith in Ham-Damn2. Are you sure the Mrs. is not a fictional character meant to ensnare innocent men?

If you must proceed in that direction, wear an Imam-Zamin--whatever that is.

Re: # 196
Thanks for your comment ["that is a great point (and only you appear to have made it here) - that the true Quaid-e-Azam can only be Prophet Muhammad"]

When I propounded this to hard-core Pakistani-Deobandis, they were initially taken aback but then smiled generously and hugged me. You too are very kind in paying compliments Mr.Eklavya. Of course, 'deen' seperated from 'siyasat' degenerates into 'Changayzi'--so said poetic Allama Muhammad Iqbal.

I remember seeing somewhere a picture of Mr.Jinnah relaxing on a bench in a park, wearing a suit and two-tone shoes--very different from the 'official pictures' in our textbooks.

If only he could return to give a taste of his two-tone shoes to these clowns who lord over us...

Regards.

Re: # 245

Tahmed sahib:

"... this simple concept makes religion a liberating force rather than an oppressive one...."

Would you agree to say that let us use "human mind" instead of "religion" in this statement?

Supremacy of mind not only matter, but concept of God, itself is a state-of-mind. Just belief in religious fundamentalism is another state-of-mind.

Many may have enslaved their mind, and thus can never understand. Irrespective who they are Hamidm or Massaddi Mian.

#253 Posted by masadi
“Things are getting interesting and will probably get a whole lot bloodier if the Americans don't get what they want,.�

These are what I call the obvious conclusions given the historical US approach in matters like the one on hand. These tricks work with the army and generals as they don’t understand what public support means and Generals give up quickly or resort to blackmail (that is what mush has been doing for the last 7 years).

In Pakistan’s case admitting defeat would be the last thing in the US mind and all those things that you mentioned mean admitting defeat in Pakistan.

There are still many pieces of puzzle that have not been defined clearly. For sure there are officers in the army that are supporting NS. The Generals and the US know that too. Any army action or Martial Law could mean civil war in Pakistan. Now the US might love that but we still don’t know whether the Pak army as a unit would go for any US forced solution that might start the breakup of the army itself.

Many people think the Generals would do anything for the US but since the Sept. 11, we are watching many fissure points in the Pakistani society. I doubt that the army is immune from resulting disputes and would outright accept any decision from the Generals or the US that would be considered unpatriotic by many in the army itself.

Pakistani politicians and the army have been dealing with the US for a long time and know pretty well how the US operates. The politicians are finally in a position to go eyeball to eyeball with the army and US and at this time I think they are going to take chances!

The WoT drama would go down considerably come Jan 20th, So the politicians now have to find a way to deal with the US for another six months or so and the way to do that is not by acquiesce but by deferring!

"this simple concept makes religion a liberating force rather than an oppressive one."

Absolutely! I have repeatedly emphasized that point, since it is so different from what many outsiders seem to expect.

HP writes "It will be hard for the PPP even in its own backyard to go against NS on this issue."

Things are getting interesting and will probably get a whole lot bloodier if the Americans don't get what they want, eventually prepping for the Iran invasion they will opt for "liberating" the Western parts of Pakistan, unfortunately the turmoil for the people of Pakistan will continue for the near future. This "move" by the Americans and its welcome coverage by the media was another step in the right direction for the people- it merely shows that what is relatively easier to accomplish with the Pakistan Army is getting a bit more complicated and they are getting ever more jumpy- hence such "mistakes"- we hope and pray that these "mistakes" continue in the future....


g'night...

#251 Posted by HP,

Thank you.

Refering to asadi’s posts.

I think the US made the worst diplomatic move in Pakistan by sending its top two diplomats at the wrong time.

They needed to wait this out. It was clear from the oath ceremony and NS meeting with John that situation is getting grimmer out there in Islamabad. NS brought in the Parliament in the whole discussion thus tying up everyone’s hands in PPP or any other forces outside.

NS has raised the stakes. I heard Saudi Arabia is pressuring him to come to the Jeddah for discussions. He is resisting that too. Eventually he will go but not until he has tied the whole thing in knots for the army and US.

Something I wanna say here: Besides his supporters in Punjab, the ANP supporters and even the PPP supporters in Sindh and the Baloch support him in his approach in dealing with the US. It will be hard for the PPP even in its own backyard to go against NS on this issue.

Apparently, his message to the US is: get rid of Mush and we will talk to you. If that means confrontation with the army, he will probably go for it and that alone would be enough to make the army back off.

#249 Posted by masadi,

it was a firm and polite rebuff, masadi. This time this idiot got no protocol, and met Nawaz Sharif in Frontier House in Islamabad instead of the US embassy as the previous Government.

majumdar writes "As per your analysis what is the purpose of this visit? And the likely outcome?"

Samosa and chai first and foremost, don't want to digress from the sage (of the sewer) Hamid's analysis then

i) keep fighting the war on terror in other words maintain the status quo and don't get any false ideas about your soverignty or challenging the military, if you don't comply we intervene

ii) Forget about the restoration of the judiciary, (like I said earlier it sets a dangerous precident for military rule in Pakistan)

outcome: i) status quo ii) martial law iii)US intervention in the Western parts with the related fireworks that are persuasion tools used by the American using the mullah who "hops to" whenever called.

zee writes "politely"

why politely? A go "F" yourself and your mama would have been more appropriate

masadi/majumdar,

First thing Negroponte did was to meet Nawaz Sharif, who's not even in the cabinet. Soundless clips were shown on TV, and the body languages were quite revealing.

Negroponte was shown the door, politely.

Here is masadi and CW Mills discussing US Elite and Peons on the West. Enjoy

http://youtube.com/watch?v=xq0YSRAXj4w

masadi #243 no you twit, i did not red-flag your posts.

eklavya sahib: while appreciating your taking the time to defend my honor before hamidm's dastardly references to me as doorknob, i would much rather you use your precious time to consider and discuss the substance of what i wrote to dr cheema concerning "religious" vs "philosophical" God.

I do agree with the important point you make to dr. cheema - that given the idea of individual responsibility to God, it does not matter if what I write is not the religion understood by many. And also i would like you to consider the implication - this simple concept makes religion a liberating force rather than an oppressive one.

Masadi sahib,

As per your analysis what is the purpose of this visit? And the likely outcome?

Regards

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

In #238 read "regarding his advertise "morality"" as

regarding his advertised morality

campfollower masadi #238: i am not going to read your post. i have used up my quota for you this week.

I now order you to write at least two more posts addressed to me or about me (with at least two personal insults directed towards me in each) which I will also not read but I like to see my campfollower keep himself in shape! You have your orders..now get to work

By the way the heading for my ilog about the Negroponte visit (below) is aptly put:

Barbarians at the Gate: Negroponte visits Pakistan....again

By the way Negroponte is on his ultimatum tour again and he is visiting with the new PM, the opposition as well as the rat (president) and seperately with Kiyani- This trip is only for exchanging pleasantries, enjoying samosas with tea, it has no political agenda because as we all know there is no such thing as the US elite or their interest in Pakistan, according to the resident scholars tahmed, and hamidm.......these idiots will be denying US role in Pakistani affairs even when one of these days the thugs in washington declare that they have to liberate the people of Waziristan...

Tahmed doesn't have a clue about anything, let alone the Quran, he reads (or better yet does not read) the Quran through the lenses of the white man's master symbols regarding his advertise "morality". In other words, he hold the Quran subordinate to what the white man tells him is correct and incorrect. Just like the "religious god" (has many varieties)- and only God knows what the hell he means by this as God has commonly been defined by religious institutions, reasoning through which led to his "philosophical god" (also having many varied varieties)- the facts are lost on him. He is spineless, moraless and thoughless. Many times (even as he has acknlowledged) he has copied what I have written about the Quran, mixed that with his white man worship and presented that as if it is "proof" of his idolatorous ways.

Science reveals a very specific God, rather than a "religious god" or a "philosophical god", consider what the facts show. That has been treated extensively by me and the article can be read here http://god.rationalreality.com

The hypocrite tahmed, is the very antithesis of the way of the Quran, ignore the fool...

cheema sahib: i'll check out your posts and get back to you later.

Hamidm: Namecalling is not an argument. And in any case, there are far more seasoned namecallers on chowk than you. So that leaves you neither here not there - just like "lost-my-deposit" lota rashid and the "rising sun" musharraf whom you were brilliantly predicting would oversmart everyone.

I could start competing with you in namecalling. But I wont. Because I like to believe that people sometimes sound more stupid on chowk than they actually are.

akcheema ji

Hope you won't take hamidm2 too seriously and mistake your interlocutors here for doorknobs.

Neither is anyone here, on either side, deaf, or blind.

The problem is that you are trying to talk across the tallest and the most impenetrable dividing wall ever constructed on earth (or in heaven).

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

BTW, it is patently unfair of you to tell tahmedji that he or any other Muslim 'can't bail out' by talking of HIS particular Islam. He does and will and has a right to, just as does and will every other Muslim. That is the essence of direct relationship to Allah (or Allah's message).

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

And that's the wall that makes all communication (on the issues of interest to you) totally futile. Can you even imagine trying to use your 'reason' with a billion plus fully-believed-in 'Islams'?

How many will you talk to and convince - one, ten, two hundred, one million?

Re: # 233 Zeemax

btw; we can also discuss the intricacies of "wahdat-ul-wujud" or its opposite in detail. Perhaps starting with Ibn-al-Arabi himself?

Personally I am of the opinion:

"dubito, ergo cogito, ergo sum"!

Cheers and Khuda Hafiz for now.

Re: # 232; Zeemax bhai

Ghalib also said something like

"Jabke tujh bin naheen koi maujood;
phir yeh hangaama ai khuda keya hai"

I am going to work

Cheers

Re: # 228 Zeemax bhai;

I think I have written a lot on this subject in the Sufi context, and if my memory serves me right, you'd find it all on the Bulleh Shah board.

Just to finish off what you started; I think it is the second last sheyr, ends like:

"yeh masaa'il-e-tasawwuf, yeh tera beyan Ghalib
tujhe hum wali samajhte, jo na baada khwaar hota".

Apologise if made any mistakes.

Cheers

Re: # 229; hamidm sahib,

I think you are right; I give up!
Although saying that, my doorknob does respond more approprately to what it is meant to do!

Cheers

Re: # 228 Zeemax bhai

Thank you sir. Please feel free to read my contributions towards the end on the Bulleh Shah board by Gill Sahib. I have spoken in reasonable detail about the concepts you are referring to. think it was in reply to Majfari Sahib.

Cheers

cheema sahib,

........ why are you talking to a doorknob (aka tahmed) ?????

#221 Posted by akcheema.

Read Ghalib:"Eeman mujhe rokay hai, jo kheenche hai mujhe kufr; Kaaba mere peechhay hai kaleesa mere aagay"

My friend, I suggest you stick to Aziz Mian Qawwal, and leave Ghalib alone.

For instance, read the following and tell me what it means:

Usey kon dekh sakta, keh yagana hai woh yakta,
Jo dui ki bu bhi hoti, tau kaheen doochaar hota.

(Hint: It has something to do with 'Duality', or lack of it)

Re: # 226; tahmed

sorry to come back again; I don't want any potential un-answered questions here.

Read Gill Sahib's articles; there has been one on the Philosophical thought in the Muslim world. Iqbal etc, and many before, there whole objective of "thinking" has been to RE-AFFIRM what is already there; it is NOT ABOUT DISCOVERING/DEVELOPING anything new. Gill Sahib has already explained it very well.

As far as the Qur'an is concerned, a very poorly written, self-contradictory, confusing/confused, bit of rhetoric. I don't get tired of explaining it by quoting none other than the great "Abu Bakr Mohammed bin Zakariya Al-Razi" the great Muslim (?) scientist and philosopher. Goes like so:

"You claim that the evidentiary miracle is present and available, namely, the Qur'an. You say: "Whoever denies it, let him produce a similar one." Indeed, we shall produce a thousand similar, from the works of rhetoricians, eloquent speakers and valiant poets, which are more appropriately phrased and state the issues more succinctly. They convey the meaning better and their rhymed prose is in better meter. ... By God what you say astonishes us! You are talking about a work which recounts ancient myths, and which at the same time is full of contradictions and does not contain any useful information or explanation. Then you say: "Produce something like it"?!"

Re: # 225; tahmed,

P.S.: When Stephen Hawking was asked by an interviewer if he believed in God (because of references to THAT word in his books), his answer was that 'If by God you mean the collective forces of the universe, that have been involved right since the Big Bang to the present day, the apparent harmony in nature etc, then yes, but not as defined by religion'. (it is not word for word; from a TV interview I watched)

That, my friend is the God of the Philosophers/Scientists (e.g., Einstein) etc and I wouldn't mind refering to THAT as God, if calling it by that particular word keeps people happy.

As far as I am concerned, That Is It; NOTHING ELSE but man made rubbish.

Cheers

Re: # 223; tahmed

Sorry you lost me there again; YOUR concept of God is called "Deism"; it has nothing to do with ritualistic religion of any kind; please get the concepts clear in your head first.

If you are referring to being a DEIST or "free-lance monotheist" as someone else described it, feel free to practice it; just don't call it Islam; as I said before, the two are light years apart.

If you insist on labelling your God and other beliefs as Islam, then I am afraid you do have to incorporate the ritualistic elements etc, including the 'hate-verses' against the Kuffar etc, the clear sub-ordination of women, second rate status of Dhimmis, and the other details you selectively choose to ignore. You can't just selective quote different eras of Islamic history to suit YOUR needs either; you can't defend the "but-shiken" attitude of Ghaznavi by quoting selective parts of "Muslim Spain"; it is far from mono-lithic, do you know why? Because of the selective, personally suited interpretations of various times. The Qur'an remains un-changed as you guys keep going on, it is all there in BLACK AND WHITE. The shades of gray are a "figment of YOUR" imagination, because it seems to suit the order of the day, and not to say yourself personally.

On what critera do you interpret one verse one way and the other a different way to suit YOUR personal sensibilities? If God is as magnanimous as you make him out to be, he could have given us something more easily interpretable, don't you think? If you had read my interacts collectively, you would,'t have presented me with the same question you have already asked and I have answered; going back a few years, I saw some similar themes on Hamidm's previous interacts as well.

You, willingly or unwillingly are held appropriately accountable and answerable to what goes around in Islam's name; and start DEFENDING the Bad with the Good; it is ONE PACKAGE wether you like it or not!

You can't just bail out by saying "that is not MY Islam"!

Khuda Hafiz; back to work

sorry for double posting on #222/223.

nice couplets by the way in #221, and quite relevant to your point.

I think you make an interesting distinction between the "Religious God" and the "Philosophical god".

The "Religious God" is nothing but an enlarged image of a king - and so if you flatter him (by kow-towing five times a day, or by offering sacrifice, or building enormous mosques or churches dedicated to him) this king will perhaps do you a favor and change rules for you so you wont get a heart attack (e.g.) regardless of how much halwa you eat, or make you wealthy no matter how stupid you are.

What I am suggesting is that this "Religious God" is based not on the Quran but on a jahil culture. That it is the "Philosophical God" as you put it (and as I discussed in that earlier post I mentioned) that is consistent with the concept presented in the Quran.

akcheema bhai #221 starting with your last sentence first - I wish there were more "defenders of the faith" around.

Indeed - I started discussion religion on chowk many years ago specifically to see if the "defenders of the faith" had any substantive arguments to present that would result in my changing my understanding of the Quran. Back then there used to be some around. I soon determined that they were intellectually dishonest and will refuse to acknowledge even the simplest bit of common sense if it ran counter to their "mullah line". Only one is left among them - gentleman named urstruly - and i suggest you see his reaction (or lack thereof) when I challenge him with some idea.

On the rest of what you say - I really think you should reflect upon the concept of God as I presented it to you on the other board that i keep referring to, and give me your take on it. Otherwise we are merely going to be having a dialogue of the deaf.

akcheema bhai #221 starting with your last sentence first - I wish there were more "defenders of the faith" around.

Indeed - I started discussion religion on chowk many years ago specifically to see if the "defenders of the faith" had any substantive arguments to present that would result in my changing my understanding of the Quran. Back then there used to be some around. I soon determined that they were intellectually dishonest and will refuse to acknowledge even the simplest bit of common sense if it ran counter to their "mullah line". Only one is left among them - gentleman named urstruly - and i suggest you see his reaction (or lack thereof) when I challenge him with some idea.

On the rest of what you say - I really think you should reflect upon the concept of God as I presented it to you on the other board that i keep referring to, and give me your take on it. Otherwise we are merely going to be having a dialogue of the deaf.

Re: # 220; tahmed
It was not to change your personal relationship with the deity of your chosing/ancestory etc; I made it clear many times to all.

I have made references to this 'free will' concept so won't repeat it here either.

Like I said, my original objective was a mere intrigue; the concept came from (may sound silly) Dan Brown's books, especially the Da Vinci Code. I just (purely for personal interest) wanted to find any so-called covert messages within Islamic art/literature etc. To my surprise, it was all over the place!

Listen to Aziz Mian's Aadmi hai benazir:

"Vaa'iz yeh samajhta hai haram mein kuchh hai;
Hindu yeh samajhte hein sanam mein kuchh hai.

Donoan ko hai khush fehmi, donoan hi hein gum;
Hum to yeh samajhte hein ke hum mein kuchh hai"

and it goes on....
Read Ghalib:
"Eeman mujhe rokay hai, jo kheenche hai mujhe kufr;
Kaaba mere peechhay hai kaleesa mere aagay"

and " Khuda ke vaastay pardah na kaabay se uttha zaalim;
Kaheen aisaa na ho yaan bhi vohi kaafir sanam niklay"

Even Iqbal is not immune. I have already qouted Bulleh Shah on that board so won't say again; I am sure you can read.

Problem is this; all the so-called believers (more than 98%) only continue to worship the same deity as their immediate ancestors (in some shape or form). That alone is testament enough towards the futility of it all.
Other problem: We are used to seeing things around us that are designed/made by something/body etc. We cannot comprehend that our world could come into being without a "will" behind it. This argument, unfortunately, shoots itself in the foot from the start; the "being" that created complex things like us HAS TO BE EVEN MORE COMPLEX! How did HE/SHE come into being? That is where all our logics stop, why? because it is 'convenient'.

All religions, Abrahamic or otherwise, are man-made. WE created the God(s) in OUR image not the other way around.

What you, and others like Iqbal and other Muslim philosophers, do is try TO COMBINE THE ABRAHAMIC GOD WITH THE GOD OF THE PHILOSOPHERS (ancients); you come up with these incomprehensible concepts to stop/win the arguments; problem is THAT GOD is light years away from the concept of God presented by man-made religion. Unfortunately, when the lie is presented as this magnanimous, incomprehensible being, who could argue.

I have already commented on this god's limitations elsewhere so please read it, or go to my intro and click on the interact icon; then you can sift through it in no time.

I suggested to Eklavya as well; there are a couple of books by Karen Armstrong on the subject. "The History of God" and "The Battle for God". If you haven't read them already, please make the effort.

Like I said, feel free to contact me off-line; in a second all the "Defenders of the Faith" will be here and it is difficult to exchange any ideas as one gets side-tracked.

Cheers.

akcheema sahib: #219 nice (though of course i have something to say about it below). i have saved the poem in my newly created folder on Urdu Poetry.

I see the context is in terms of shortcomings of God, not mankind. And you also make the same point in #218 - i.e., if the environment is a mess, then that too is God's will.

This interpretation of Islam is in fact pervasive in Pakistan (i.e. everything is God's will). In my view this interpretation is driven not by the Quran but by a dysfunctional culture that discourages the individual from believing that he can make a difference. This is why I say this:

In the sentence you quoted, it says everything is due to God's will. But that sentence is not relevant to the fact there there is such a thing as human will as well. That is - God's will created human will in the first place.

And it is this human will whose importance is emphasized by what i consider to be the core message of the Quran - namely distinguish between right and wrong and to do the right thing (see Surah Baqarah, e.g., where it says that regardless of this if you believe in God, in the Judgement Day and do the right thing you have nothing to fear).

The huge contribution of the Chief Justice to Pakistan has been to demonstrate that one man who has the courage to stand by his convictions can indeed make a difference. His example inspired other judges, lawyers, civil society, and the political parties to all join hands to stand up for something higher than their own petty ambitions.

This is Islam in action - inspiring people to do the right thing. Not binding them down as slaves to the "ulema" or other charlatans or whining about the west conspiring against them or ranting about "muslim grievances" like the bearded hypocrites who have disgraced Islam.

One last thing on the last couple of lines"

Apni Pehchaan Ki Khaatir Hai Banaya Sub Ko;
Sub Ki Nazaron Say Magar Khud Ko Chup Rakha Hai

The Quran says that God created man to learn about His creation ("learn the names of his creation"). Not about God Himself, as the verse implies (who in fact can never be fully understood - and i already wrote a piece on this concept on the other board that i had addressed to you).
And God's creation is all around us to see - and today we can see 7.5 billion light years away, and also check it out at the sub-atomic level at the other extreme.

And so - this reinforces the above-mentioned core message - i.e. to use one's God given abilities to not just do the right thing, but indeed to extend the frontiers of science and human understanding of God's creation.

So - this "shikwa" doesnt make much sense either. And so my comfort with being a muslim in today's modern world remains unchanged. :-)

Re: # 214; tahmed

here is the whole "band" so you get the context:

Dil Peh Hairat Nai Ajab Rang Jama Rakha Hai;
Aik Uljhi Hui Tasveer Bana Rakha Hai
Kuch Samajh Mein Nahi Aata K Yeah Chakkar Kia Hai;
Khail Kia Tum Nai Azal Say Yeah Racha Rakha Hai
Rooh Ko Jism K Pingray Ka Bana Ker Qaidee;
Us Pay Phir Mout Ka Pehraa Bhi Bithaa Rakha Hai
Day K Tadbeer K Panchi Ko Uranay Tu Nai;
Daam-E-Tadbeer Mein Her Sumt Bicha Rakha Hai
Kar K Araish E Qounain Ki Barsoon Tu Nai;
Khatam Karne Ka Bhi Mansooba Bana Rakha Hai

La-Makaani Ka Bahr Haal Hai Dawa Bhi Tumhein;
Nahl-O-Akrab Ka Bhi Paighaam Suna Rakha Hai
Yeah Burai, Wo Bhalai, Yeh Jahannum, Wo Bahisht;
Is Ulat Phair Mein Farmao To Kia Rakha Hai
Jurm Aadam Nai Kiya Aur Saza Baiton Ko;
Adl O Insaaf Ka Mi'aar Bhi Kia Rakha Hai
Dai K Insaan Ko Dunya Mein Khilafat Apni;
Ik Tamasha Sa Zamanay Mein Bana Rakha Hai
Apni Pehchaan Ki Khaatir Hai Banaya Sub Ko;
Sub Ki Nazaron Say Magar Khud Ko Chup Rakha Hai

Re: # 217; tahmed bhai
"- given the mess mankind has made of the environment".


Qur'an[64:11] Nothing happens to you except in accordance with God's will.

akcheema #214 that verse certainly seems appropriate - given the mess mankind has made of the environment.

(my comment below was about the naee, btw. i mean, he could not have been a bigger charalatan - khalifa - than musharraf.)

#214 akcheema: But he could not have been a bigger khalifah than musharraf.

#213 Naqsh: Dont get angry at me for stating the obvious. Read the Quran instead and then talk about Islam to me.

Re: # 213 and 209;

The only 'Khalifah' I remember from a long time ago was the 'naaee' in our pind!

"day ke insaan ko duniya mein khilafat apni;
ik tamasha sa zamaane mein bana rakkha hai!"
(Naaz Khailvi)

Re: # 209

'caliphs have no real religious signiifance in islam!' -- the nost igonrant comment and the most untrue even by your standards!

the caliph --arabic is khalifa in its shortened form or, originally as used by hazrat abu bakr -- khalifatul Rasulallah--literally 'the vicegerent of the messenger of god [upon him be peace]' -- is the political AND spiritual head of the community of muslims.

little knowledge is a dangerous thing...

For those who get confused by reading Eklavya's long, winding explanations, here is a shortened version of his #196.

"Tahir bhai, you are delicious! Burp!"

Eki, don't be afraid of conflict. There has always been conflict there will always be conflict. You as a kafir, should be glad...u have better resources, better intellect, and there is no need to kneel and bob five times a day. So stop being afraid.

Chalta, dunno what to say to that...There is only conflict that way... :(

[Some argue that this conflict is inevitable, but still one keeps hoping and looking for a way out at one's own little level...]

tahir #195 " Islam's great leader or anything like the caliphs"

the prophet was a messenger, not a political leader. the caliphs have no religious significance in islam. Get that clear in your head first.

Then realize that caliph is just another word for a king or a dictator. So, looking into the past for "guidance" from caliphs as as stupid as driving on a highway while looking at the rear view mirror.

God gave you a brain that is better than that of a goat. So use it.

No..but one should make as fun as possible of choots who believe in elephant gods riding rats or those who kneel and bob to the moon god from arabia. For those within these believers who think they are special, should be put into little special ed school buses and dropped off a cliff...for those who think that shit written thousand years ago as tribal laws for a local society is relevant today, should be tarred and feathered...and those who are waiting for a one eyed devil..should just look in their pants and messiah would come.

We don't have time for these idiots eklavya...we are trying to evolve and frankly don't have time to cater to relics of a mediocre past wth mediocre thought. Except for making fun of them and where appropriate dropping a daist cutter or two or even lubing up the ramrod,

CA, some people are happy to have their elephant-nosed god ride around on a rat's back. Some can't wait to get to all that cheese awaiting them on the moon.

So long as you don't put the rat-god and the moon-cheese together, what's the problem?

A billion plus people also believed that the earth was flat, the moon was made of cheese and on the 7th day god rested to smoke a blunt.

Cheema,

hamid2 is always around to make fun of all religions. It's quite an envious job.

One leaves this place for a couple of hours and look what you come back to!

Zeemax and Tahir Bhai: As far as I am concerned, the matter is closed unless "aap ne gadhay murday ukhaadhne hein?". Water under the bridge.

That penis envy thing Tahir bhai can still be up for discussion (don't worry you can spell it fully, no need for innuendos!; don't tell me the word makes you blush!!Common!).

Eklavya bhai; mostly "sar kay ooper say guzar geya; keya karain dimaagh hi aisaa hai bhayya". That doesn't mean you should ramble on on the subject more though! When I called you Eklavya "the chakkerbaaz", I used it advisedly.

The hindus here; what can I say. I have criticised some of the silliness of Abrahamic faiths so far; please don't even get me started on your version of the same gobledeegook please! May be not a bad idea; might even generate a laugh reaching all the nooks and crannies of the land! Let us leave it there guys.

What I have learnt so far is that most of the truth behind belief is hidden well behind "thick scotch mist!". That can have the capacity to make it fascinating, like fairytales to a child (for me at least), or make others do silly things at times. This is NOT just one single set of faith/values though; none of them are immune from this nonsense. It is best to interpret this exactly as it is, hidden behind scotch mist. It is when we become very sure and certain of "the truth (our version)", the problems start. Worse, when we try to impose it on others.

The reason mankind invented religion/gods etc is essentially an extention of "the imaginary friend" psychology of childhood. Subsequently, this permeated into the wider human psyche as "the clan" concept, to bring a group of people together (for mutual identification).Now have your imaginary friend console you, give you hope personally etc, don't expect others to just "see him/her" exactly "how YOU see it"! because that is when the problems start.

Learn to live and let live for once! and don't let anyone (especially some fairy in the skies or ridiculous looking statues), divide up humanity.

Cheers; and Happy Easter/Eid Milad/Holi/others etc etc.....Amen (sorry for the belated message).

CA, a rose by any other name would smell as sweet but connoisseurs care :)

As to logic being circular etc., who cares if it work perfectly for a billion plus people?

eklvya, did tampax show you how he kneels and bobs, yet? it is written in quran or is it qu'raan or koran or q-ran or kewron or kuron or simply the compendium of 7th century circular logic.

In post #198, I meant, colonialist, while quoting Winston Churchill.

zee, thanks for clarifying that important distinction between bowing (in respect and admiration) and prostrating (in surrender) yesterday. I will keep it in mind.

#193 Posted by tahir,

Maestro, please tell me which books, what interviews, and who is this Ham-Damn2 who is about to lose his better half to you?

Guess I don't have to say about the books and the interviews , but I can say about Mrs. hamidm2. she's a Momina (from what he has told us), and would gladly dump him for a Momin if she had the slightest chance.

So, Mrs. Hamidm2 Zindabad!

Zeemax

Post #159

" He badmouths Jinnah for being some sort of dictator while supporting musharraf."

To quote a so called parliamentarian (though a colonist to the core),Winston Churchill, "The honourable gentleman is being economical with the truth."

On the contrary, Mr Cowasjee has been praising Mr Jinnah as if he was the best thing ever happened to Pakistan, since the arrival/introduction of sliced bread. All along he has been quoting excerpts from Mr Jinnah's various speeches relating to freedom for everybody.

Actually, it has been quite tiring to see Mr Cowasjee quoting Mr Jinnah, day in and day out. And many a times, even when it did not warrant.

By the way, I have not read him/his coloumn for over 3 years now. If things have changed during this period, I do not know.

I seem to have a contracted a bad case of 'greats' in #196. Lame excuse: agree or disagree with Propeht Muhammad and Mr. Jinnah, it's impossible to overuse that word when describing these two men even briefly.

tahir, that is a great point (and only you appear to have made it here) - that the true Quaid-e-Azam can only be Prophet Muhammad. And for all his greatness, Mr. Jinnah was still no original caliph.

Still, we shouldn't, even by implication, minimize Mr. Jinnah's great, truly exceptional, religious status. After all, in Islam, politics and religion are the same sides of the same coin. Take politics out of Islam, and I don't know what would be left behind.

[Hope you won't misread it as an insult to anyone, but a possible statement of fact. For instance, I asked Mr. Tehsin Abbasi (one of Mr. Hamidm's friends) if there was ever in history anywhere a significant political dispute that Muslims as a group had with any group of non-Muslims, which was not turned soon into a religious fight for Islam, and didn't receive a response from Mr. Abbasi.

My feeling (which you may correct) is that that would be hardly possible because the religious and the political are inspeparable in Islam. So as a great political leader of Muslims who probably changed and saved the lives of More Muslims than anyone other than Prophet Muhammad himself, Mr. Jinnah deserves a very rich and honorable place as a religious leader as well.

And with justification as well: All the great religous pirs of India worked mightily but as tiny underlings to help Mr. Jinnah's great effort and struggle (and if THAT was not a great Jihad then we would need to re-think what Jihad might be.)

Of course, you seem very knowledgeable, and if you disagree, we will respectfully hear your view. Thanks in advance.

Re: # 177
Majumdar sahib,

In calling the man Qaid-e-Azam, one forgets that that title is best suited to Prophet Muhammad (peace on him).

Muhammad Alibhai Jinnahbhai Khojani changed his name to sound acceptable to English ears. He was a political leader but never Islam's great leader or anything like the caliphs.

Regards.

Guru...that was hilarious :)

Re: # 173
Maestro, please tell me which books, what interviews, and who is this Ham-Damn2 who is about to lose his better half to you?

Re: # 166
Wham-bam-thank-you-HamDamn2,

First Paki yourself some more. The word is PAKISTANI; say it aloud, don't be shy little boy.

Second, what is 'mo of mecca'? I've heard of a land where sons address their fathers as 'hey john' instead of abba.

Third, what you call 'petty things' cannot be understood by the mice of Shah Daulah. Brain-size matters!

Fourth, if you insist on calling God's Word 'silly book', I will neither foam at the mouth, nor come after you with a spanner to Detroit, but....leave you alone to be dealt with by your Creator (now I don't mean Uncle Sam here).

Fifth, may you prosper beyond fourth grade and have many men who would love to hold your hand and drive into the sunset, and then off into a cave.

Don't bother answering.

Peace now.

Re: # 165
Mr.Cheema, your assertion that that's the way it is spelt everywhere is incorrect. The man who opened my eyes to meticulous English spellings for Arabic words is:

http://us.st11.yimg.com/us.st.yimg.com/I/islamicbookstore-com_1995_178688 0044

Not only has he spelt it as Qur'an, he uses a diacritical mark over the alphabet 'a' to show that it must be lengthened during pronunciation. He spelt Arabic words meticulously! Some languages are richer than others don't you agree?

As for Dawood's spelling:

"N.J. Dawood is perhaps the only Jew to have translated the Quran into English. Available in the Penguin edition, Dawood's translation, The Koran (London, 1956) is perhaps the most widely circulated non-Muslim English translation of the Quran. The author's bias against Islam is readily observable in the Introduction. Apart from adopting an unusual Sura order in his translation, Dawood is guilty also of having mistranslated the Quran in places such as Baqara II:9 and A'raf VII:31, etc."

Now THIS and much more is part of the information I have on various exegesists and translators from various sects and religions. I have personally checked most of the information for correctness.

Shall we consider the matter amicably settled now, or do you still insist on having duels with grown men?

Regards (I mean it).

Re: # 163
Mr. Zee, thanks for the pointers. Although I cannot see what's inside men's heart, I do have a keen sense of observation.

One must focus on delivering with consistency. You're right about who spells Qur'an as Koran. In my reply to Mr. Cheema I will solve the riddle for him--for good. I don't know anybody who spells it as Koran. Even when I was unaware of many things, I always felt that that was not the right way to spell it.

As for your suggestions to Mr. Cheema regarding the 'P'-envy issue, I must now bury my face into a feather-filled pillow to ensure that the sound of laughter does not reach Australia or wherever they spell it as Koran.

Regards.

http://drvasu.wordpress.com/2007/10/25/concept-of-god-osho-islam-zakir-naik-and- the-acid-test/


This explains Abrahamic religious mumbo-jumbo.... migh help not only Ek but Anek Aagh Lawya.

Picked up from http://www.jhuger.com/kisshank.php

This morning there was a knock at my door. When I answered the door I found a well groomed, nicely dressed couple. The man spoke first:

John: "Hi! I'm John, and this is Mary."

Mary: "Hi! We're here to invite you to come kiss Hank's ass with us."

Me: "Pardon me?! What are you talking about? Who's Hank, and why would I want to kiss His ass?"

John: "If you kiss Hank's ass, He'll give you a million dollars; and if you don't, He'll kick the shit out of you."

Me: "What? Is this some sort of bizarre mob shake-down?"

John: "Hank is a billionaire philanthropist. Hank built this town. Hank owns this town. He can do whatever He wants, and what He wants is to give you a million dollars, but He can't until you kiss His ass."

Me: "That doesn't make any sense. Why..."

Mary: "Who are you to question Hank's gift? Don't you want a million dollars? Isn't it worth a little kiss on the ass?"

Me: "Well maybe, if it's legit, but..."

John: "Then come kiss Hank's ass with us."

Me: "Do you kiss Hank's ass often?"

Mary: "Oh yes, all the time..."

Me: "And has He given you a million dollars?"

John: "Well no. You don't actually get the money until you leave town."

Me: "So why don't you just leave town now?"

Mary: "You can't leave until Hank tells you to, or you don't get the money, and He kicks the shit out of you."

Me: "Do you know anyone who kissed Hank's ass, left town, and got the million dollars?"

John: "My mother kissed Hank's ass for years. She left town last year, and I'm sure she got the money."

Me: "Haven't you talked to her since then?"

John: "Of course not, Hank doesn't allow it."

Me: "So what makes you think He'll actually give you the money if you've never talked to anyone who got the money?"

Mary: "Well, He gives you a little bit before you leave. Maybe you'll get a raise, maybe you'll win a small lotto, maybe you'll just find a twenty-dollar bill on the street."

Me: "What's that got to do with Hank?"

John: "Hank has certain 'connections.'"

Me: "I'm sorry, but this sounds like some sort of bizarre con game."

John: "But it's a million dollars, can you really take the chance? And remember, if you don't kiss Hank's ass He'll kick the shit out of you."

Me: "Maybe if I could see Hank, talk to Him, get the details straight from Him..."

Mary: "No one sees Hank, no one talks to Hank."

Me: "Then how do you kiss His ass?"

John: "Sometimes we just blow Him a kiss, and think of His ass. Other times we kiss Karl's ass, and he passes it on."

Me: "Who's Karl?"

Mary: "A friend of ours. He's the one who taught us all about kissing Hank's ass. All we had to do was take him out to dinner a few times."

Me: "And you just took his word for it when he said there was a Hank, that Hank wanted you to kiss His ass, and that Hank would reward you?"

John: "Oh no! Karl has a letter he got from Hank years ago explaining the whole thing. Here's a copy; see for yourself."
From the Desk of Karl

1. Kiss Hank's ass and He'll give you a million dollars when you leave town.
2. Use alcohol in moderation.
3. Kick the shit out of people who aren't like you.
4. Eat right.
5. Hank dictated this list Himself.
6. The moon is made of green cheese.
7. Everything Hank says is right.
8. Wash your hands after going to the bathroom.
9. Don't use alcohol.
10. Eat your wieners on buns, no condiments.
11. Kiss Hank's ass or He'll kick the shit out of you.

Me: "This appears to be written on Karl's letterhead."

Mary: "Hank didn't have any paper."

Me: "I have a hunch that if we checked we'd find this is Karl's handwriting."

John: "Of course, Hank dictated it."

Me: "I thought you said no one gets to see Hank?"

Mary: "Not now, but years ago He would talk to some people."

Me: "I thought you said He was a philanthropist. What sort of philanthropist kicks the shit out of people just because they're different?"

Mary: "It's what Hank wants, and Hank's always right."

Me: "How do you figure that?"

Mary: "Item 7 says 'Everything Hank says is right.' That's good enough for me!"

Me: "Maybe your friend Karl just made the whole thing up."

John: "No way! Item 5 says 'Hank dictated this list himself.' Besides, item 2 says 'Use alcohol in moderation,' Item 4 says 'Eat right,' and item 8 says 'Wash your hands after going to the bathroom.' Everyone knows those things are right, so the rest must be true, too."

Me: "But 9 says 'Don't use alcohol.' which doesn't quite go with item 2, and 6 says 'The moon is made of green cheese,' which is just plain wrong."

John: "There's no contradiction between 9 and 2, 9 just clarifies 2. As far as 6 goes, you've never been to the moon, so you can't say for sure."

Me: "Scientists have pretty firmly established that the moon is made of rock..."

Mary: "But they don't know if the rock came from the Earth, or from out of space, so it could just as easily be green cheese."

Me: "I'm not really an expert, but I think the theory that the Moon was somehow 'captured' by the Earth has been discounted*7. Besides, not knowing where the rock came from doesn't make it cheese."

John: "Ha! You just admitted that scientists make mistakes, but we know Hank is always right!"

Me: "We do?"

Mary: "Of course we do, Item 7 says so."

Me: "You're saying Hank's always right because the list says so, the list is right because Hank dictated it, and we know that Hank dictated it because the list says so. That's circular logic, no different than saying 'Hank's right because He says He's right.'"

John: "Now you're getting it! It's so rewarding to see someone come around to Hank's way of thinking."

Me: "But...oh, never mind. What's the deal with wieners?"

Mary: She blushes.

John: "Wieners, in buns, no condiments. It's Hank's way. Anything else is wrong."

Me: "What if I don't have a bun?"

John: "No bun, no wiener. A wiener without a bun is wrong."

Me: "No relish? No Mustard?"

Mary: She looks positively stricken.

John: He's shouting. "There's no need for such language! Condiments of any kind are wrong!"

Me: "So a big pile of sauerkraut with some wieners chopped up in it would be out of the question?"

Mary: Sticks her fingers in her ears."I am not listening to this. La la la, la la, la la la."

John: "That's disgusting. Only some sort of evil deviant would eat that..."

Me: "It's good! I eat it all the time."

Mary: She faints.

John: He catches Mary. "Well, if I'd known you were one of those I wouldn't have wasted my time. When Hank kicks the shit out of you I'll be there, counting my money and laughing. I'll kiss Hank's ass for you, you bunless cut-wienered kraut-eater."

With this, John dragged Mary to their waiting car, and sped off.

Re: # 80

"ekalvya,

.... i just had a thought .... are you thinking of reverting to islam and then going on the masjid lecture circuit to make the big bucks ?........ muslims really lap up that kind of stuff, but you will have to get in line behind white men and women - a desi convert is not that much of a novelty .... i think you can make a lot more money if you follow in the footsteps of yogananda and maharishi - there is a bigger market for hindoo nonsense in places like california ....."

haha...Hamidm you are
incorrigible ...

... I did cuss his (presumably imaginary) daughters though (for which I profusely apologized later) whom he was gleefully teaching to write messages on israeli artillery shells headed towards Lebanese civilians.

#172 Posted by akcheema

And keep your hands off other people's wives for God's sake!

I'm not eying his wife. I have sympathy with Mrs. Hamidm2 being stuck with a wise-cracking murtid loser. I would be glad to offer her a better husband when she kicks him out with his clothes and a bottle of cheap whiskey in a brown paper bag.

... of-course majumdar dada is exempted ... but he'll just lure in yelping pups like bjkumar etc ... LoL

#176 Posted by akcheema

The man was an agnostic, drank and ate pork/ham openly; married a Parsi girl and produced a Parsi child. Couldn't even say "Namaz/Salat".

err ... you forgot one thing ... that he also kicked out and disowned from his inheritance his only child, a daughter, for marrying a Christian without turning him into Muslamaan first.

Besides, there you go again with deliberate and malicious disinformation. Everyone knows he converted Rutti to Musalmaan before marriage.

No one knows who really Jinnah was, except perhaps Dina, and Allama Iqbal, in my view the greatest Muslim who lived this side of 11th century, who handpicked him to lead the Musalmaans of British subcontinent for some reason only he knew.

But for God's sake I don't want to start a debate on who Jinnah really was otherwise the bhartis will jump in.

tahir writes "Enough for one day; I must now return to getting CHOWK editors to publish what appears to have been consumed by their office 'bakri' as part of Operation Cleanup.."

Does that mean the half a dozen articles of mine that they censored for no reason other than to block my voice and ideas will be published on Chowk? Regime change for Chowk is what is needed to get it back in line with its constitutional claim of "all are welcome to read, write and think."

Re: # 115

hamidm,

if ever i am in the area you live in (detroit) i will let you know and we can meet for dinner. to visit the honourable shaykh kabbani would be a pleasure...

asif :-)

Anil writes "This one-liner is so from Bollywood "C" movies. "

I don't watch Bollywood movies A, B or C I have better things to do with my time than worry about saas bahoo ke batin and song and dance....now get off my goddamned case you a-hole.

akcheema "Besides who is to decide how it should be spelt; that is not the original language of the text and it can potentially be spelt any way appropriate to convey the message as with any other proper noun."

It is unfortunate that the mullahs having too much time on their hand would make an issue of the spelling of Quran/Koran. Comprehension is what it should be about. If you are writing for a Western audience, the are most familiar with Koran, they would not as easily understand Qur'an- so while writing for them as audience I use Koran (as you will see all over my website), while writing for Muslims, who cares how you spell it, you can spell it as "Q" and they would understand it...more important things to argue over people than this....time to get past this mullah syndrome...

Re: # 177
Majumdar Bhai,

My intention here was NOT to prove if he was a "pukka musalman" or otherwise.

I think you know very well what I was trying to say!

Cheers.

Re: # 153

Massaddin Mian:

"...I am on the right side in this battle, the side of light and not the darkness, barbarism, destruction...."

This one-liner is so from Bollywood "C" movies.

You cannot even plagiarize from a decent source. At least try Hollywood movie one-liners. Please take classes from Salim Sahib on creativity. These days, Salim is in a fighting mood.

Cheema sahib,

Surely MAJ was Islam's greatest leader since the rightly guided Caliphs.

(but you are adament he wasn't a murtid!)

You can contact Atif Payee for details to show that he was a true Muslim.

Regards

Re: # 174; Majumdar Bhai

aren't you upgrading MAJ's status a little too high here? And btw, pbuh is usually only reserved for prophets; before someone else tries to set you straight! I personally don't care.

The man was an agnostic, drank and ate pork/ham openly; married a Parsi girl and produced a Parsi child. Couldn't even say "Namaz/Salat". I have nothing against that personally, but you are adament he wasn't a murtid!

All his "persona" of a "mard-e-momin" was created and refined to an art form after his death. You should read in detail before allocating him sainthood, I reckon!

Cheers.

Re: # 173; no, not recently.

Zee sahib,

Re: Spelling of the Prophet and the Holy Book

I guess just becuase someone spells it some way does not make him a bad way unless his intention was clearly to denigrate it. "Mahound" certainly seems to be in that catgeory. I have spelled Koran that way without having any desire to insulting anyone's sentiment.

And surely you cannot overlook the fact that MAJ (pbuh) spelt his name as Mahomet. And he was probably Islam's greatest leader by a mile since the days of the rightly guided Caliphs. Certainly not a anti-Muslim or a murtid by any chance.

Regards

#169 Posted by akcheema,

No I'm not talking about the vermin's book. Have you seen any of his interviews?

Re: # 169; Zeemax

I apologise for some cheap remarks I might have made in anger; I don't think getting personal gets us anywhere.

I do sincerely mean it.

And keep your hands off other people's wives for God's sake!

Cheers.

#167 Posted by akcheema,

I have seen both worlds and since I live in yet another part of the world, gives me a lot deeper perspective than you'd ever have.

Hmmm ... as if no others may have done the same, or the few who did, failed to develop any 'deep' perspectives.

But a dingo is a dingo in one place and a dog in another. The bark is the same! Doesn't change much with climate I guess ..

#166 Posted by hamidm2,

I have never cussed your wife. As per whatever you've told us about her, she seems like a good Momina, and I wouldn't mind asking for her hand in marriage when your Nikah is nullified by you officially declaring yourself a murtid.

Re: # 163; Zeemax
"Just as the pope of murtids rushdi spells Muhammad as Mahomet".

If you are referring to "the Satanic Verses", it was spelt/distorted to "Mohound" and NOT Mahomet.

Thought you needed everything clarified.

Truce now?

#164 Posted by hamidm2,

Well, all I wanted to establish was that cowasjee has no credibility and you shouldn't quote him on anything. When he says "sala sub chore hai", that may be true or untrue, but one thing is certain that he himself is a big "Chor"....

Re "the venom and acrimony i see between the pml-n and mqm guys on tv does not bode well for the future", it indeed does not. I see this move of MQM to ditch the Chaudhries as some sort of wheeling dealing to get into the federal cabinet - in which case - PML-N will not join it and restrict itself to Punjab and form Punjab Government without PPP. That will in turn bring about the eventual fall of the government in the center, re-elections, and a clean 2/3rd sweep of PML-N in the next snap elections just as in 1997 because PML-Q will have dissolved by then.

The issue of PML-N re MQM is a very fair and principled one. They just want to know what exactly happened on May 12 in Karachi, what were the motives behind it, and who was responsible. Is enquiry into May 12 an unfair demand? MQM refuses to concede on that even though it claims innocence, and PPP is not asking for it either to get in bed with MQM - in order to preempt any move by Amin Fahim in forming a 'forward bloc' with MQM support in Sind.

PML-N has a clear and principled stand on each issue, in harmony with public sentiment, which will win them unprecedented support in the future while usurpers and conspirators will fall by the wayside.

Re: # 165; Zeemax

just to clarify my education as it seems to have bothered you a bit. As I said befor on Gil Sahib's board, I was born in England and grew up between the UK and Pakistan; I have seen both worlds and since I live in yet another part of the world, gives me a lot deeper perspective than you'd ever have.

I speak/read/write english because it is almost my first language; on what grounds do you use "the gora boli"; then you went all funny when I mentioned "sour grapes" before!

Re: # 163

zeemax,

the pakis spell muhammad as mohammad or mohammed; the turks spell it as mehmed or mehmet; i call him mo of mecca ........ so what is the difference ? a false prophet by any other name still has clay feet .......sorry for the mixed metaphors, but you get the point ...

...... i really don't understand why you mohammedans (or muslims as you like to be called) get so upset about such petty things ..... seems to me that your faith is not as strong as the horrible hindoos who don't mind people making fun of their god's tail or nose ......what is it that causes you people to react so violently to percieved and real insults ? ...... look, you and others have insulted, abused and cussed my wife and daughters (real people as opposed to the bedouin in a cave) and i have just ignored it .....why can't you do the same ? .... what is it in your primitive brain that makes you start foaming at the mouth just because someone spells the silly book as 'koran' instead of the stylized 'qu'ran' or whatever ? ..... you guys remind me of the kid in fourth grade who would go into a blind rage if someone called him a homo; by eighth grade he had many boyfriends and finally found happiness .......

Re: # 163; Zeemax
"As for his spelling of Qur'an, how many people who were educated in Pakistan spell it this way? The answer is NONE."

That is exactly how it is spelt, not just in Pakistan, but most parts of the Muslim world. The Qura'an you suggested, I have not seen anywhere including Pakistan.

btw; Dawood's translation of the Qur'an is spelt as Koran; that happens to be a well respected translation. May be you should write to him as well.

Besides who is to decide how it should be spelt; that is not the original language of the text and it can potentially be spelt any way appropriate to convey the message as with any other proper noun.

This faithfreedom thing you keep refering to; on your recommendation, I did look up. There is nothing there I didn't know about; don't tell me I have presented you with any challenges from that web-site. As for the questions raised on that website, they all appear pretty genuine; regardless of who is asking, you should try to answer them perhaps. May be consult with Tahir Sahib and the others as well to "up the anti"! as they say.

What I write here, comes from my own mind, unless I specify, use quotes/parentheses or at times references or state that I came across some material elsewhere. May be you should try that so we all know who happens to be behind your ideas.

Re: # 159

zeemax,

.... okay, so cowasjee is naked in the hamam with the rest of them - nawaz sharif, gilani and the choudhary brothers ..... but you must admit he has taken musharraf to task on the 'disappeared' and he has always called him the 'lesser evil' ..... besides, the man is just a loud mouth and not one of these politicians who seem to be up to their old tricks again ...... the venom and acrimony i see between the pml-n and mqm guys on tv does not bode well for the future ...... in a couple of months ppp might have to change 'partners' - i hope it doesn't happen, but it doesn't look good ...... as cowasjee says, "sala sub chore hai" .... you have to agree there is some truth to that

#155 Posted by tahir,

Mr. Tahir, you're being too gracious in accepting this akcheema's apology which is neither sincere nor honest.

It is a white-lie. When he says in #113 "That is a pure oversight; I am not the world's fastest typist.", you should see how many words he types in all caps in his posts i.e. CAPITAL LETTERS ... and you'll know what I mean. This person (or whatever creature he is) does it deliberately.

As for his spelling of Qur'an, how many people who were educated in Pakistan spell it this way? The answer is NONE. This is straight out of faithfreedom.org and shows the crusader spelling of the name. Just as the pope of murtids rushdi spells Muhammad as Mahomet.

Re the envy of the male reproductive organ he mentioned, I suppose he would be well advised to solace the female amongst his nearest and dearest who has that sense of deprivation by saying to her that - as long as she has one of hers - she will have plenty of those!

Re: # 161
"I dunno about that, but yours is certainly all about whirling around with a big dhol around the neck in sheer ecstasy brought about by 'love' of the Prophet Muhammad sustained by a heady punch of bhang".

LOL!

#114 Posted by Naqshbandi,

... for wobblers like u islam is not about devotion to allah and his messenger but all about killing and political power...

I dunno about that, but yours is certainly all about whirling around with a big dhol around the neck in sheer ecstasy brought about by 'love' of the Prophet Muhammad sustained by a heady punch of bhang.

Congratulations! Your murshid, Pappu Saeen of Baba Shah Jamal fame, has been awarded the 'Tamgha-e-Imtiaz' yesterday for doing just that and doing great service to the whirling variety of Islam.

Re: # 159; Zee bhai
".........because he thinks everyone is a fool but himself."


...hmmmm.....who else do I know that fits the description I wonder......

#103 Posted by hamidm2 Re: # 96

zeemax, okay, you are right ... he wasn't a minister .....

Thank you. Next time do check your facts before making your argument.

.... but i really don't get the point of this discussion ... what are you trying to prove ?

What I'm saying is cowasjee is a typical humbug kind of looney who shouldn't be taken seriously. Even his own extended family members avoid him because he thinks everyone is a fool but himself. He badmouths Jinnah for being some sort of dictator while supporting musharraf. He has a beef with everyone and everything except the khakis whom he adores. Have you read his accolades about every retired army man he has ever known from colonels to generals?

BTW, let me tell you something (and you can verify it). This fake and fraud, who blackmails every large builder by obtaining stay orders based on civic arguments to stop constructions, has himself fenced off an empty plot of Government land adjacent to his house, built a gazebo in it, and uses it as his lawn. The society administration keeps sending notices which he ignores because they know they won't demolish it, him being the biggest media blackmailer around.

Enough for one day; I must now return to getting CHOWK editors to publish what appears to have been consumed by their office 'bakri' as part of Operation Cleanup! To criticise Islam and Pakistan is okay here, to satirise the Western ideals in not.

See you all, soon.

Re: # 115

May I say something to the resident of the Motor-CIty madhouse?

Wahabbis don't call themselves Wahabbis, but rather Muwahidoon (unitarians).

Explaining away the beauty of the Qur'an (now watch your spellings unless you've only read Orientalists) with the Alif-Lailawi Sufi-Hadith literature is a great injustice.

Mercifully, the Most Merciful provides insights into things only to those who walk the path with reason, faith and unwavering sure-footedness.

Take that step now.

Re: # 114
All the dancing girls revere this saint too!

Let's see what Mr. Gilani does standing on his own two feet instead of the crutches of his ancestors.

Peace

Re: # 113
To realise something is the first step! Do take time out (away from surgery) to notice these little things that somebody older (hence wiser) points at. Your apology is now public and sounds honest and hence acceptable to me. Mr. Zee will do what he pleases.

Positioning one's little finger over the SHIFT button is easy to master. For example: shift 'm'= M!

How does one's sexual organ come into the arguement? One must neither drag the 'thing' around nor think through it.

Peace.

Re: # 89
Liberal means: tolerant of different views and standards of behavior in others, borad-minded, favoring gradual reform, especially political reforms that extend democracy, distribute wealth more evenly, and protect the personal freedom of the individual (now isn't that Islam??)

Mr. Zee, do refrain from name-calling Ejaz's father, who died leaving us just the dentures to weep over (buried at Faisal Mosque, Islamabad). Don't we all laaahhhve to hate the dictator?

And I would strongly suggest that you drop the pseudonym.

Regards and season's greetings.

hamid writes "to be very honest, there are only three people and one woman on chowk who, i believe are rotten to the core and i will not suffer - masadi, urstruly, romair.."

It is a great honor and privilage to be on your bad list. That tells me that I am on the right side in this battle, the side of light and not the darkness, barbarism, destruction and global destitution that you support. The cure for your ailments and frustrations is a long walk off a short ledge....

Re: # 142
You are correct. BJP is very much opportunistics and is lacking leadership skills in centre. In fact, internal feud has caused much damage (Uma Bharti, Kalyan Singh). BJP has not gained popularity through mass movement. Ram temple movement was supposed to be in people's mind beyond few years. People expected a better alternative of Congress. Some Pakis see BJP as religious party like they have ( who support Quoran, Haddish, Sharia, Huddod, Blashphemy lasw...). Ha ha ha....., I fill pity for them....

Re: # 150 Hamidm Sahib,

are you sure you discount masadi's assertions about the US elite completely?

Cheers

tahmed,

.... don't feel slighted - you are also welcome whenever you come to michigan ..... regardless of your rather queer and quaint views on islam that have no bearing to reality, you are a harmless chap and i would be more than happy to buy you a couple of beers and then beat some sense into you! ......... to be very honest, there are only three people and one woman on chowk who, i believe are rotten to the core and i will not suffer - masadi, urstruly, romair and that woman frau sadna ........ for them there is no redemption .... what about jayp and arjun? ... they are just a pair of hormone crazed kids who have yet to discover an outlet for their sexual frustrations .... i will take them down to eight mile road and buy them a twenty dollar whore - that will get them off your back ....

Re: # 146

Tauheed sahib, one can always hope for the best. However, the simple reality is that the external constraints on Pakistan stay exactly the same as pre-election, and perhaps it matters very little who the current players are. The power to change those constraints in all likelihood resides at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and nowhere else.

More worrisome is the (apparent) fact that even the internal constraints have not changed. You can blame Mushy all you wish but he is a mere individual and was nothing without the khaki institution behind him. Yet nobody dares to blame those real culprits who installed him in place and kept him propped up over their own awaam.

There is no sign that there has been any change in the mindset of that institution.

Perhaps it IS possible for the US policymakers to accord a bit more dignity to the new leaders than those who only understood the language of being "bombed back to the stone age" - that would be right and proper. However, many of these leaders have a track record of wasting opportunities.

There was no deliberate intent on my part to rile you up! (Sometimes these things just happen.) :)

Re: # 147; tahmed sahib,
Point taken. I wish I could share your enthusiasm about this farce; have a look at Tariq Ali's website; he is a crank but says something useful now and again.

I would invite you back to the base planet though when you are ready!

#144 akcheema sahib: in making this analogy, you are once again overlooking that "minor" point about the voice of the people which is what makes pakistan after mush different than Syria (or any other arab dictatorship or kingship).

#145 anil sahib: my anger makes no difference. it is the vast majority of pakistanis who have said "enough" to musharraf's outrages.

mush was not beholden to the Pakistani people, and acted accordingly. With the new government it is the reverse. A representative government carries a gravitas that a tinpot dictator can never posses. No doubt Pakistan will be a much stronger and much more reliable member of the world community now that the tinpot is reduced to begging to be allowed to "serve out his 5 years", even if only as a powerless figurehead.

Re: # 138

Tahmed sahib:

Only thing I am attributing to you, is anger against Musharraff. Woh bhi munasib ho sakta hai, abhi.

Yes, Tahmed sahib, I believe that Musharraff could have wrecked the elections, and delayed democracy, and even made the path bloodier. Saudis are no friends of democracy, therefore, neither their protege, Mian Nawaz is.

I also believe, that Pakistani government needs to demonstrate that it can take a stand independent of the U.S. "Bombing back to stone age" etc. indeed put Pakistan as very week and gave birth to thoughts that Arjun expresses. Hopefully, democratic Pakistan will put such nonsense behind.

Re: # 141 tahmed

you mean like ZAB left the throne for BB, and her for Zardari/Bilawal?

anil sahib: If I was Indian, I would no doubt be concerned with exactly the same issues that you describe about BJP and can understand your frustrations with them.

Re: # 135

Tahmed sahib:

Neither BJ nor anyone can send BJP back to 2 or 3 seats in the Parliament. This is the reality of India, as a viable alternative to Congress is essential. Two umbrella organizations for regional parties are needed.

More appropriate would be to let BJ kind of BJP walahs to put relentless pressure on BJP to get rid of Modis and other RSS fascists. BJP is an opportunistic party, and can change faster than a chameleon.

Everyone, including BJP walahs in the U.S., believes that if BJP had brought the deal with the U.S., it would have supported even the worst deal. The same is said about the negotiations with Pakistan, leave it to BJP, else it will never go through. I am surprised to see young Indian generation here to include Laddus, Rangers, and Harimaus. Keeping them in minority is so important whichever party they belong.

#140 akcheema sahib: Asad killed 10,000 people in Syria, make himself dictator for life, and then left the "throne" to his son. This may be OK with you. It is not OK with most Pakistanis.

And these were 10,000 human beings - fathers, sons, mothers, daughters - not "pathetic representations of protoplasm" I am talking about. Please practice what you preach when it comes to "moderation".

Re: # 138; tahmed

Mush did what he could, only not enough. He should have learnt something from Hafiz-ul-Asad (Hama 1982), who sorted out Islamism in Syria for a long time to come!

It would appear that is the only language these pathetic representations of protoplasm understand; sure as day after night, they won't even spare the likes of "moderates - whatever that is" like you unless you conformed.

So thank your lucky stars for living where you live and don't knock it like every other Paki I have seen!

#137 cheema sahib: what did i say that is divorced from reality? and the "survey" was already held on feb 18. so please dont write as if it never happened. the people have spoken loud and clear, so dont write as if they never spoke. hundreds of pakistanis have been killed int he process. the democracy forces are united.

the maulvis, the militarists and the lotas and the man-who-would-be-hosni-mubarak are in disarray. that is the reality of pakistan today.

#136 anil sahib: you think musharraf had a choice in these free and fair elections? i am not calling for him to be lynched - only that he be treated in accordance with the law, and not be placed above the law. so please dont attribute views to me.

Re: # 135; tahmed

I think you are completely detached from reality; or you have your own version of it.

Pakistani politics has always followed the feudalistic system that was never eradicated. Just read what Mr Naqshbandi has said on another board; he is prepared to carry Gilani's shoes to display his respect and to honour this "syed-zaada's" ancestors.

What hope is there for the common joe bloggs in the street? Like I said, it is different when one is completely de-tached from the process....go and do surveys amongst the masses to find out why they vote for whoever they vote; the result may prove more sobering than you think!

I say this coming from a "paindoo" background, or describe it however you will.

Re: # 119

Tahmed sahib:

Aap mein bahut gussa hai, Musharraff ke khilaaf. Whatever, it is please do not take away the crdit of brining free and fair election and restoring grass root democracy from him.

Tahmed sahib, his public prosecution should be postponed by 10 - 15 years. You must not let him be lynched.

#133 bjkumar: you reduce bjp seats in lok sabha to the number of religious party seats in pakistanis national assembly (3), then come talk about secularism.

Re: # 132; bjkumar

If I had a say in the matter, I'd employ you to re-write our Pakistan Studies textbooks!

Jinnah had no idea man; he was, upto the last minute, hoping for a con-federation type arrangement with Nehru. The partition as we know it now was never in anyone's mind including "Iqbal the rhetorician". It was always "muslim majority provinces to have jurisdiction over there affairs UNDER THE STATUTE OF WESTMINSTER"!

He didn't know what hit him when he swore in as GG of "the Dominion of Pakistan",; statesman my ar..! Least he could have done in the year and a half he was around after the mess was to give SOME SORT OF A DIRECTION rather than quoting "the law-giver, prophet of Islam", who he knew nothing about!

It is because of this reason that we have erected a strong, tall wall separating the state from the Church in the USA.

After all, secularism would be rather difficult to practice if the USA were the "Christian States of America"!

Somehow, the contradiction between setting up an "Islamic" republic and practicing secularism does not seem to rattle my Pakistani brothers and sisters too much!

"Mera khota naseeb!" (Long breath)

Cheema sahib, for what it is worth, it is entirely possible that the Mushy was not despotic at the outset. He said he took the "job" not because he wanted to, but because of fate.

However, in the absence of any checks and balances, it was only a matter of time before he would turn autocratic. That same thing has happened to other military rulers AND the civilian leaders too.

Whether a system of checks and balances can ever be created without affecting the "Islamic" character of the self-professed "Islamic Republic" is a matter that can be debated endlessly.

I do not believe the Jinnah had a solution for that problem.

Re: # 130; tahmed
"or why you think i could help you, though"

sorry have i missed something? when did i ask for anyone's help?

akcheema: these are certainly important subjects. seems to me our country was hijacked not by maulvis but by musharraf and his lotas , though. and now the pakistani people have taken it back by force.

as for maulvis, they were merely convenient lotas (in case of fazloo) on the one hand, or convenient bogeymen (in case of alo qaeda and co) he used to prolong the time he jijacked the nation.

its all very simple, IF one is prepared to look at realities and actions, rather than the hollow words this man dishes out every day.

i am not sure what your article is about, or why you think i could help you, though. i will be glad to discuss any ideas or issues you may wish to to discuss on chowk, however. i can discuss offline too - but on chowk you get the benefit of other opinions too.

Re: # 128; bjkumar bhai,
"and if they could somehow rejuvenate the Jinnah that will be just fine – "

Right again sir; Jinnah was a deeply anglicised agnostic (at best) who, from a practicle viewpoint, had as much to do with Islam as a humble murtid such as myself!

Cheema sahib,

Many of my Pakistani brothers and sisters on this site have a rather simplistic way of looking at an issue. They look for salvation coming from a farishta-like strong father figure – and if they could somehow rejuvenate the Jinnah that will be just fine – to deliver them from the problems.

“If only that shaks were around – hai Allah, what a different place we would be living in!� (Long breath!)

In the same vein, they also look for individuals (preferably a single individual) to blame for Pakistan’s ills.

“Ya Allah, ye kaise bakery ko hamara ruler bana diya! Aghar ye nahiN hota to baat hi kuchh aur thi!� (Long breath!)

Mushy seems to be the current “goat� for some people. It is conveniently forgotten that he could have – had he wanted – become a Saddam or even God forbid – a Zia-ul-Haq!

There are certain advantages to such a simplistic thinking!

It makes it highly convenient to look away from the systemic weaknesses which create those goats in the first place!

Re: # 123; also tahmed bhai

My "leaving faith" had almost nothing to do with the current political atmosphere, especially since 9/11. I left because I found this whole gobeldeegook intellectually unbearable and by anyone's standards a complete farce.

My current interest has everything to do with the present day atmosphere though; I felt the least I could do was to speak out about it and this may allow others to have the courage too who felt the same way (you really didn't read my interacts from the start, did you?).

Re: # 124; bjkumar bhai
"That divide is supposed to travel unidirectionally, and if brother Kaal is to be believed, is virtually unstoppable!"

THAT is what I have been talking about here all this time!

Re: # 123; tahmed

that is what i mean...its wasn't about me but to get material for an article i was writing elsewhere...drop me a line if you want; btw, I am quite secure where i am as i am sure you are too; it is more about our culture, country etc being hijacked by vile islamists

Unfortunately, it is hard for me to keep repeating myself time and again as the context to this began a while ago; so if you have any queries about the details of my disbelief, feel free to drop me a line...

Re: # 115

Mian Hamidm2,

Before you go all mush-mush over the Naqshbandi, be advised that he is on record that there is a legitimate distinction to be made between dar-ul-Islam versus the other kind of dar-ul. And the size of your booze bottle very much depends on which side of the divide you fall into. That divide is supposed to travel unidirectionally, and if brother Kaal is to be believed, is virtually unstoppable!

cheema sahib: chowkies are a catholic lot, as much at home in pakistan politics as in theology. (i dont know why i am being so positive, must be something i ate).

but seriously, i have no problem with discussing dissent, apostasy etc. what are you dissenting against?

#120 CreateAlpha: no drama-baazi please.

Re: # 116 tahmed
you make it sound a lot worse than it is; I am referring to a childhood experience so please judge it at that level.

What you seem to forget is, I discovered CHOWK via a google search looking for "dissent/apostasy/Irtad" in the Muslim world; it took me to Gill Sahib's article on Bulleh Shah.

Listen to the qawwali if you don't mind, the full version. Also Nusrat Fateh's "tum ek gorakh dhandha ho", and give me your take on those. Fel free to e-mail me and I can give you my direct e-mail; best not irritate people here who want to discuss paki-politics rather than the intricacies of theology!

So a guy who saved pakistan from being bombed back to the stone age is worse than a set of corrupt and insiduously inept feudals like zardari and nawab. Tahmed yaar, socho kuch

anil sahib: mush wants to know if you would like to buy the Brooklyn Bridge from him.

hamidm: so naqshbandi sees mush on tv and he comes across as an honest guy and you offer him beer!! no wonder arjun believes pakistanis are inbred retards.

Re: # 114

Naqshbandi sahib:

"...despite his mistakes he genuinely seems to be a straight-forward guy who wants the best for pakistan...."

Believe it or not, I have the same feelings when I watch Musharraff, and honestly I cannot say that I feel the same about Zardari or Nawaz. His innings is over, let see how is his exit.

#111 akcheema: you listened to a qawwali, but you ignored (or at least did not comment on) the perfectly rational and intellectually honest explanation of the concept of God that i had presented on another board.

wrt the bubble that is human life: you say this sounds nihilistic, but in fact it is anything but that when you consider that you are part of a much bigger and grander scheme of things.

Re: # 114

naqshbandi,

..... you are a good man ........if all muslims were like you and my mother i would be okay with being a muslim ..... unfortunately, she is dead and you are a dying breed ... these damn wahabis are what islam is all about nowdays ... even the koranist tahmed is a wahabi-in-waiting with his absolutist 'everything is in the book' nonsense .... what happened to that live and let live islam ???

... look me up if you are ever in detroit - maybe we will go and visit sheikh kabbani who has a large following among the lebanese in this area .......

zeemax: why do u call zia al haqq (a man I do not and never did like) --a disgusting name of zina-al-fuck? i would have thought a nihilist-wahabi-terrorist-sympathiser like you would
have liked the man who, more than anyone else, was responsible for the rise of this extremist deobandi-wahabi strain of islam in pakistan.

and even if u don't like him--why call him disgusting names? its not terribly islamic is it? oh yeh, i forgot. for wobblers like u islam is not about devotion to allah and his messenger but all about killing and political power...

oops!

p.s. i am all for this gilani fellow--by his name i guess he must a descendent of sayyidina ghawth al azam shaykh sayyid abd al qadir al jilani al baghdadi, the greatest of all the sufi saints of islam?

also, i saw this interview with musharraf on geo tv the other day and--well i LIKED the guy. despite his mistakes he genuinely seems to be a straight-forward guy who wants the best for pakistan. i hope he is allowed to stay...

Re: # 83 & 88; Tahir and Zeemax;
"These people, I don't know what to call them, have no basic 'respect' and they're supposed to be liberals".

That is a pure oversight; I am not the world's fastest typist. Same is true for hindu/christian/judaism etc; sometimes I get it right, sometimes I don't; I can assure you its not deliberate and DOES NOT have covert meaning/feelings etc. Besides i am severely dyslexic too.

My apologies.

However, if we are still in the domain of penis-envy, I'd try to take extra care from now on.

And I'd try to spell it Qur'an; is that acceptable?

Re: # 77; Hamidm sahib,
"i feel jilted - am i a smaller murtid-muslim than cheema-come-lately?".

that can never happen; so please don't you go getting paranoid as well! there are plenty like here already..I'd be happy to do "bayt" on your hand and pledge allegiance any day sir!

Re: # 98; tahmed bhai
"i know this sounds grim, but life is grim when you are a small bubble in an endless ocean".

that is a bit nihilistic isn't it? Cheer up man, it might never happen!

Like I said, I live a good life (not meaning financially); If your God is as grand as you make him out to be, just read your own excerpt above; he might reward me for using the brain he gave me than of intellectual cowardice! Surely he must have SOME sense of justice.

I have said before, I began to doubt the religious rubbish in my adolescent years. The thing that made me think for the very first time, and yes you can all laugh, was a qawwali by Aziz Mian (I didn't even like qawwali then!). It was none other than "Aadmi hai benazir"; please do me a favour and listen to the full version carefully once or twice. That got me thinking......

Re: # 109

GT,

... we can talk to india because they are horrible hindoos and not muslims ..... as the great slobodan milosevic of serbia once said about the bosnian mohammedan leader, ibrahim izetbeogovich, "how can you talk to a man who doesn't drink ?"

#108 Posted by hamidm2:

What is your take on this Gilani guy? He said something like - If we can talk to India then why not to our own guys. I kind of like that!

Re: # 107

GT,

... that is what he said in one of his posts - but who knows ... you can't trust these people

#106 Posted by hamidm2:

No, I mean has he left the US?

Re: # 105

GT,

... it is an educated guess, but where else would he go?

#104 Posted by hamidm2:

"and then finally took off to take up residence somewhere in a cave along the pak-afghan border"

When??!! Is this true?

Re: # 100

zeemax,

... urstruly is the epitome of an asshole - the man was right here in michigan and for years i kept on inviting him to meet and discuss this over a couple of shirley temples and whiskies, but he declined .... i wonder why?

.... he ranted and raved against america while living on government handouts and then finally took off to take up residence somewhere in a cave along the pak-afghan border ..... unlike you - who is suffering from the common strain of type-II islam brought on by the onset of old age - the man is a born jihadi ........ you are just trying to save your keester from hell fire like the other type-II patients .....

Re: # 96

zeemax,

okay, you are right - i misread and he wasn't a minister ..... according to wikipedia :"Ardeshir was appointed by Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto as Managing Director of Pakistan Tourism Development Corporation (PTDC) in 1973 but was jailed for 72 days in 1976 by Zulfikar Ali Bhutto for which no explanation has been given to date"

......... so what is the difference ? ....the fact remains that the man has been an outspoken critic of everyone including zia, bhutto and musharraf even though he seems to have a personal vendetta against the bhuttos ...... but it still puts him, nawaz sharif and many others in the same boat as far as zia is concerned ......

.... but i really don't get the point of this discussion ... what are you trying to prove ?

zeemax: but i'll agree that it is not correct to accuse someone of something behind his back. So, replace "urstruly's brand of islam" with "zeemax's brand of islam" - the one where you applaud the fata mullahs. and correct me if i am wrong here.

in any case, the distinction between the peaceful live-and-let-live version of islam of hamidm's parents vs the oppressive version that i made below is still valid.

zeemax #100 urstruly has not made any secret of his view that religion is not a choice and that his sympathies are with mullahs. thus - when the suicide bombing took place in lahore, all i saw from him was talk about how the first bombing was ok because it was targetted against pakistan government.

i dont claim to be an intellectual, so it doesnt matter if he has written not just chowk articles but best sellers.

tahmed32,

Urstruly is the most talented writer of short fiction on Chowk. There's no doubt about that. Religion has never figured in any of his short stories.

And you try to label him? It's disgusting to say the least.

What contribution do you have on Chowk other than 10,000 plus posts pushing your deen-e-akbari and supporting Israel and one article about how wonderful it was to invade Iraq?

I suggest you read Urstruly, and tell me his calibre as a writer, forget about his religious views. That's why he stopped writing, because of this bigotry.

to clarify #98 you wont get reprimanded because you wont be meeting ancestors, not because you should not be reprimanded for selling out on their peaceful view of islam..

hamidm: hate to break this to you - but you are not meeting any ancestors either. islam is not about afterlife social get togethers or afterlife partying. so dont expect there to be miller time. i know this sounds grim, but life is grim when you are a small bubble in an endless ocean.

on the bright side, you wont get reprimended by your ancestors for selling out their religion to urstruly.

the one time i saw cowasjee, he was supposed to talk profoundly while we ate sandwiches. instead he started complaining of chest pains and i had my sandwich without any intellectual serenade in the background.

#94 Posted by hamidm2,

So from all your googling, that's what you could come up with. LA Times as quoted by some micropakistan.org/blog.

In 1976, while serving as tourism chief, he was jailed for 72 days by Benazir Bhutto’s father, Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto

Bhai, cowasjee was never in the federal cabinet of ZAB. He may have been some gofer in some Tourism Development Authority or something. Raja Tridev Roy was ZAB's Tourism Federal Minister.

But, he sure as hell was the Federal Minister for Shipping in zina-ul-fuck's cabinet.

Now google that for confirmation.

hamidm: when your ancestors meet you, they'll ask you why you gave their islam a pass and proclaimed urstruly to be the righteously guided one..

zeemax,

... he was the miister of tourism - the man is somewhat of a gadfly but he hasen't spared anyone including bhutto, zia, benazir or musharraf ......

http://micropakistan.org/blog/2008/02/15/article-on-cowasjee-pakistan- columnist-doesnt-know-the-meaning-of-fear-la-times/

... I mean cowasjee ... when was he in ZAB's cabinet?

#91 Posted by hamidm2,

He joined Bhutto's cabinet? When?

Re: # 89

zeemax,

.... i don't know - he also joined bhutto's cabinet who then threw him in jail ..... i guess he joined zia for the same reason as nawaz sharif, yousaf gilani and many others - power, wealth, fame .... the usual reasons ....... what's the difference ?

#87 Posted by hamidm2,

No, you won't meet your ancestors. That's only in the movie you saw. You'll meet something else, and that's 'eternity' with 'God' somewhere around, but you still won't find Him.

That's my little secret I just let you in.

(P.S. You can meet your ancestors though, but you don't have to die for that ... and that's a secret I'm not going to let you in)

#86 Posted by hamidm2,

Why did this cowasjee join zina-ul-fuck's federal cabinet? You still haven't answered this.

#83 Posted by tahir,

Yes I noticed your intervention.

These people, I don't know what to call them, have no basic 'respect' and they're supposed to be liberals.

Re: # 85

zeemax,

.... so ancestor worship is okay with you?

.... since you are being so nice, i will let you in on a little secret if you promise not to laugh ...... i actually believe that when you die you will meet up with your mother and father and other ancestors - it has something to do with the source of energy and the theory of relativity which is too convoluted to explain ..... a simpler explanation: have you seen the film 'contact'? ..... when i saw that movie, i jumped up and said, 'that's it! that is what i believe in' ......and trust me, jodie foster had nothing to do with it even though she gives me arrhythmia .....

Re: # 82

zeemax,

.... are you comparing cowasjee to nawaz sharif? .... cowasjee is not a politician and i don't think he has ever run for any office ..... he is just a cranky old man with a lot of money who is always complaining about something or the other .... agree with him or not, he speaks his mind ...... that his why bhutto threw him in jail ......and he has done quite a bit of good with the cowasjee foundation, tcf and his crusade against corruption .....

actually, i cannot stand to read his rambling 'columns' which are all over the place ...... he does make a good case for euthanasia .......

#77 Posted by hamidm2,

....... and how come you never asked me to spell koran the way you would like it spelled ? ........ i feel jilted - am i a smaller murtid-muslim than cheema-come-lately ?

I'll give an honest answer to this.

Hamidm, you never forgot your Burqa wearing grand mom, or your mom, or your father, and you revere them.

If you ever have a chance, read the little signs pointing the streets in Gulshan-e-Iqbal and what is written underneath them.

In the meantime, you may have your fun :)

Re: # 81

bubba,

.... i have actually thought about it, but since you can play this card only once i am saving it for when i am on the jihadi's death row waiting for an open guillotine ....

Re: # 76
When he habitually spells Muslim using lower-case 'm' (for which I corrected him!), why do you think he spells Qur'an as Koran?

#66 Posted by hamidm2,

While it's true Nawaz emerged on the scene during zina-ul-fuck's time, he was elected with sheer landslides numerous times afterwards including this time, despite having been in exile for 8 years and his party split, and being allowed back just a 'single' day before final nominations date. If his survival was dependant on anyone else other than the people of Pakistan (military dictatorships), he would now be another Ch. Shujaat.

How many elections has that hero of yours kawasjee won?

Hamid,

Is there something like a born-again muslim? Maybe you should avail that opportunity.

ekalvya,

.... i just had a thought .... are you thinking of reverting to islam and then going on the masjid lecture circuit to make the big bucks ?........ muslims really lap up that kind of stuff, but you will have to get in line behind white men and women - a desi convert is not that much of a novelty .... i think you can make a lot more money if you follow in the footsteps of yogananda and maharishi - there is a bigger market for hindoo nonsense in places like california .....

Re: # 78

zeemax,

.... are you trying to get away with your silly comment about cowasjee ?

.... and what is this sovereignty of the moon god if it is not sharia and all the barbarity that goes along with it ? ..... stop obfuscating .... the people of the world have been there with pharoahs, popes, prophets, messiahs, and other blood thirsty shamans and priests - we will not be misled and continue to spill blood at the altar of this or that god .....

... by the way, ekalvya is playing you for a fool but you are so eager for affirmation, specially from a hindoo, that you are lapping up his nonsense ...... i am sure you also wet your pants when you heard that michael jackson and mike tyson had reverted to islam !

#75 Posted by Eklavya,

No ... a Muslim prostrates before no one but Allah. I acknowledge your insight and I bow to you, not prostrate.

Sovereignty of Allah is a difficult concept to grasp, in the context of governance and worldly affairs etc. I've been thinking of writing a post to ferozk re his #639 on Pavo's board, but he wouldn't understand, would he?

I will write that post in any case, because he brought up the question of how the west will never tolerate a Muslim system, which in his limited knowledge and insight he restricts that to just the criminal jurisprudence part of Sharia. All these educated and knowledgeable people are totally clueless.

The only difference is 'sovereignty of Allah', and nothing else. But that's a 'huge' difference. The west could happily co-exist with Muslims if only they would understand that. If they don't, there's nothing but conflict.

zeemax,

.... so you agree with my contention that nawaz sharif was a bigger collaborator than cowasjee ? ..... good! .. now we can move on

....... and how come you never asked me to spell koran the way you would like it spelled ? ........ i feel jilted - am i a smaller murtid-muslim than cheema-come-lately ? .... i have been waging jihad against you jihadis for years and this is the respect i get? .... or have i worn you guys down to the point that you are ready to give up on your bloody ways and follow the prophet(boy) tahmed in his quest for a kindler gentler islam ?

#39 Posted by akcheema,

akcheema saheb,

May I request a final courtesy from you?

I promise to not call you a murtid anymore. In return you should spell Qur'an as 'Qura'an'. Not Koran.

Thanks and regards.

he he, I got to run, but Zee, you are a dear friend and a Muslim. A Muslim bows before none but Allah. I so wish we had anything like that. :)

Catch you later. :)

hamdim2, that's there as well. LOL

... Sigh .... KaalChakra ... the quest continues:

#649 by kaalchakra on July 2, 2007 7:46am PT
Zee, don't feel bitter. It's not worth it, my friend :)

See, this is how, imho, consciousness evolves.

First, there is the stage of ignorance. Where an ignorant person believes that there is nothing "unique." Hindus, most of them, operate at this level.

Second comes the stage of stupidity. That's when one experiences the world a little, notices some facts, but militantly asserts that ignorance is what is good for him or her, NO MATTER WHAT. Almost all liberals operate at this level.

Third comes the stage of goodness. This is where a person knows differences but still feels committed to saving the world somehow. Since the world can not be saved, bitterness follows. This is zeemax' stage.

Finally one reaches the stage of kings and emperors. Here the objective is not to SAVE the world, but to RULE over it. Key requirements here are of equanimity and focus. That's were echodada operates. :)

#70 hamimdm: and what was your parents' understanding of islam on this question? and why are they mistaken in their understanding of islam?

masadi: s'dreams.

#62 Posted by Eklavya,

You never cease to amaze me. You, being a non-believer/non-Muslim know Islam so well, that I bow before you.

Re: # 62

eklavya,

....you are a charlatan !.... you missed out the most important form of islmic faith which should have been number one :

1) One follows the faith blindly and fanatically - he is convinced that he is right, that islam is destined to be the dominant faith and that everyone else is wrong. He wages war in the name of al-lah and his prophet. This is the koran and sunnah based view and is shared by those who speak for islam today.

........ stop being cute - it is not becoming !

one more thing before I go, tahmed #68, who the F are you to tell me to get lost, does this site belong to your papa?.

By the way, my comments on the photo that tahmed posted here can be read at this site http://chowk.com/interacts/13775

Regarding the "temptation" that he (tahmed) claims walked into his room, that was probably a 300lb dishwasher named Helga! It was a matter of life or death and he passed it by so he could write more BS on chowk....

now g'night

g'night

masadi #65 g'lost.

Re: # 65

sweet dreams, sweet prince - don't forget to look under your bed for the us elite and other demons .......

zeemax,

..... one more thing - if zia-ul-haq had a protege, it was nawaz sharif ......... if the first khalifa had lived probably would have handed over the khilafat to his handmaiden ....... but i am willing to give him the benfit of doubt hoping that he has learned a lesson from his past follies and attempt to get installed as amir-ul-momineen ....... compared to him cowasjee is just a low level collaborator ......

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

hamid writes "....... unfortunately, my parent's brand of islam is dead or dying and today's resurgent islam is correctly represented by people like urstruly and zeemax ...... "

Last I read your dimwitted posts, your blanket condemnation of Islam went back in history much further than the 1950s and 1960s, you were taking your BS blanket condemnations all the way back to the time of the prophet, now when your parents are involved, you do a turnaround....reminds me of how Bush used the gassing of Halabja to justify attacking Saddam in 2003! ....keep it up hypocrite

Re: # 61

zeemax,

.... let's not go there ..... he is not talking about institutions, he is talking about people ..... and if you are talking about people who hobnobbed with zina-ul-fuck, let's not forget that both nawaz sharif and yousaf gilani belong in that category - both earned their wings under the abu bakr of pakistan ...... let's move on

akcheema ji, thanks for the ton of information you provided. You raised so many points that I must beg your indulgence in not addressing them all right now. Allow me to make only a couple of points, which we may, if they interst you at all, discuss over time.

1. By far, most importantly, I would re-iterate for the nth time (and hope you would give this serious consideration): Islam's ideal is NOT blind belief. One can easily rank order the preferred form of Islamic beliefs as follows:

(1) Considered, thoroughly questioned, belief wherein one discovers for one's private self SOME WY/ANY WAY to answer natural human questions to re-affirm faith in Islam. This is the much-celebrated "no-church" (knowledge-based) view.

(2) One follows a wali, a learned person, who has understood Islam, and one is therefore certain that one is on the right path by following such a person. This is the sufi (love-based) view.

(3) One really doesn't get into the specifics of Islam and considers all must be right, and focuses on matters of day-to-day living. This is probably the 'vast majority' (good-life or action-based) view.

(4) One gets caught up with black bakra charms and even blacker handi objects. Many knowledgeable Muslims will call that the superstititious and ignorant (kufr-based) view.

(5) Some people born in Islamic world, for whatever personal reasons, can't accept 1-4. But sooner or later they come to fully realize that all opposition is futile; and then they settle down to a life of private grumblings, smart-alec comments when they feel safe, and fake public smiles and pretense of adherences to Islam in view of friends and family. These people count for nothing, but if they achieve anything, immediately their achievements are celebrated as Islamic achievements.

1-5 are perfectly acceptable forms of Islam, and all those who follow them are ultimately 'good and acceptable' Muslims. However,

(6) Some, again for whatever reasons, are unable to stay even at level of Islamic belief, and begin to publicly oppose Islam itself (not other peoples' "interpretation" or understanding of Islam).

Islam cuts off these people's reproductory system.

----- This has gotten longer than I expected. Will address the rest of the points later, if you don't completely lose patience. Best regards.--------

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

zee boss, only a fool and a Hindu will read all this as just pure fiction and bed-side entertainment.

#57 Posted by hamidm2,

As usual you're evading the main argument. How dare this senile old fool ridicule democratic institutions for misdeeds of the past while himself having hobnobbed in the past with people like zina-ul-fuck who flogged journalists - during this fool's tenure as an unelected federal minister - and hanged the elected prime minister?

That was the question.

hamidm: apologize for what? i didnt specify your parents, and as i said you did mention some ultra-conservative relatives as examples. if you tell me that in fact it is not their brand of islam that you criticize, then that is a change from what you wrote earlier.

if your parents version of islam is dying, you are certainly contributing to it by denying it the same legitimacy that you give to urstruly's brand.

akcheema sahib: sleep well sir, and take good care of your patients tomorrow. i am not pushing any beliefs on you (how could i even if i wanted to?). but if you are going to jump onto the bandwagon of long-dead hypocrites in the vatican jeering the prophet's personal life, i have a right to put things in perspective. which is what i did in #51 and which i hope you will keep in mind next time you get the urge to jump on the bandwagon along with some head-shaking dot-wearing hi-b from madras.

#53 Posted by hamidm2,

With due respect, did your revered mom (May Allah bless her) also throw saffron colour on you playing holi holi?

Re: # 54

zeemax,

.... i sincerely hope the senile old fool is wrong, but i am still a little sceptical that these leopards can change their spots .....

Re: # 55

tahmed,

....... unfortunately, my parent's brand of islam is dead or dying and today's resurgent islam is correctly represented by people like urstruly and zeemax ...... when i was growing up wahabis were considered to be a small cult and people whispered about them - today it is the dominant strain of the islam virus ......

....... i still demand an apology

hamidm: OK, i'll admit that i was too stressed with exams once to take advantage of an outstanding opportunity for committing vice that literally walked into my room. however, i am slandered by your innuendo that i am incapable of vice. in fact, the time i waste on chowk is proof is a vice!!

ok, so your illustrious father was not one of the ultraconservatives, nor did i mention him particularly. but you did mention once some relations like that more than one time.

coming to your mom - that is a different story. She is obviously an example of the Islam I am talking about. Is her understanding of Islam in any way less valid than that of a muslim version of jeremiah wright??!! In fact, she is exactly the way my elders were - kind and gentle people. So next time you get the urge to claim that islam drives people to become criminals, tht i am in fact not the mainstream, think of your mom and dad and how you are turning them into non-persons when you claim that only urstruly represents islam.

I rest my case.

#43 Posted by hamidm2,

cowasjee - he has been around longer than even you and he says, "yeh sala sub chore hai" ....

Sure. He's been around long enough to have been in zina-ul-fuck's cabinet as federal shipping minister.

This senile bugger is only pissed because no other government took him seriously ... ignored as a buffoon ... just as one hamidm2 of chowk.com.

Re: # 51

tahmed, bewakoof!

"it is muslims like yourself and hamidm, who (as you yourselves have indicated) both seem to have been raised in ultra-conservative families are so are revolting against it as adults. "

..... how the hell did you figure that out ?..... that is slander and i have half a mind to sue you for slandering my father and mother (god bless their souls) ..... my father, in particular, must be turning in his grave! ... other than twice a year when, after a hectic search, he put on his karakul cap and headed off to the ghq ground to offer his eid prayers behind ayub khan, yahya khan and bhutto khan, the man left god and his prophet alone ...... he also liked his scotch and i suspect he made a decent second income playing bridge .... his most famous quote is, "anyone who does not have a vice is either an angel or a chutiya!" ......i think that he had people like you in mind when he made that comment ....... and my mother was a spiritual person, but hers was a benign form of islam that revolved around halwa, kheer, chahar shamba, shab-i-barat, zarda and mounting blackened handis on the roof or sacrificing black bakras to ward off evil spirits .....

..... i demand an apology for insulting the memory of my parents

Re: # 51; tahmed bhai

I didn't chose to sideline anything. It is all a result of rational analysis. It is always very difficult for one to explain the reason for being an atheist to a believer.

Just because I think you are a decent person, I don't have to subscribe to your beliefs.

My critique is more to do with making people think; who knows where skepticism can take us!

I feel I have a morally fulfilled and happy life and I simply donot need religion/god etc; all I want is others (especially from similar religio-cultural backgrounds) to enjoy the same freedom of thought as well. I have no personal axe to grind with this god person; for that one has to acknowledge their existence (that issue has been addressed elsewhere - may be you can run through my posts over the last month if you have the time).

My only child is well adjusted and I have already talked about her upbringing elsewhere, probably on Gill Sahib's Bulleh Shah board, so feel free to jog your memory.

The final sermon, incidently, doesn't talk about all this lovey dovey stuff you seem to be referring to; may be we'll have to agree to disagree on that.

It is well past my bedtime so I'd have to say Shab Bakhair to you. Talk to you soon, Insha-allah!

doctor sahib #49: your point about the prophet being made a role model is well made. but note - no one harps on the fact that he had multiple wives, and certainly pakistanis are no more likely to have multiple wives than any other people. when he is set up to be a role model by ordinary pakistanis (the mainstream, if you will), it is with respect to universally accepted values like honesty, integrity etc. references are given to his final sermon where he spoke about respect for all religions.

so who harps on his multiple wives and other aspects of his private life? first, european priesthood of the middle ages(and that is where my example of lucretia borgia becomes relevant) who hated islam as causing schism among believers (the exact charge that Dante made against him in is not-so-Divine Inferno) and whose hypocrisy (high living, sex scandals) are too well known for me to mention. second, hindus obsessed with intimidating and demonizing minority religions within their country who have picked up on this theme and try to ape the west by repeating this ridicule of his private life, ignoring the primitive and sexually-laced customs in their own communities. So, my reference to the lingum worship was quite relevant. their hypocrisy is also too well known. third, it is muslims like yourself and hamidm, who (as you yourselves have indicated) both seem to have been raised in ultra-conservative families are so are revolting against it as adults.

this is not a particularly mature reaction, and you will simply be making your children feel insecure and feel bad about their heritage.. when in fact they should be celebrating both their pakistani heritage as well as the broader heritage of all humanity that every educated person has and which every pea-brained chauvinist (whether hindu or muslim) will never have.

my question to you is this: if you have no problem with my understanding of islam, why do you chose to sideline it? what do you think you are achieving with this?

I hope this Amir Hamza was as quick witted a chap as my friend Abu bhai!!!

Regards

Re: # 45; tahmed Bhai

Like I said before, I have absolutely no problem with YOUR religion/belief system; whatever it may be, it can't be labelled mainstream Islam. I only hope there ARE others like you in the Muslim world.

Problem with your assertion with "my fascination" is that ABSOLUTELY NO ONE IN THEIR RIGHT MIND IS ASKING ANYONE TO FOLLOW THESE GUYS AS ROLE MODELS; Islam's whole edifice is based on Mohammed, his Koran and Sunnah and it is followed blindly, without question, by the majority of his followers. THAT IS A BIG DIFFERENCE.

No one in their right mind, nowadays, is blowing themselves up or killing someone else to protect the honour of their prophets but us muslims. So why should't we elaborate a bit on what we have been asked to follow blindly since birth?

I find your examples and the logic quite out of place here if I am allowed to say it. Besides, it was in reply to someone else's request and the parenthesis indicates, it is not my personal opinion but someone else's. You, or anyone else, is welcome to draw their own conclusions.

Amir Hamza's story, alongwith Umro Ayyar etc are part of OUR culture; I grew up with them same as anyone else from that background. Unfortunately, they have been presented here as a representation of "Islamic Culture". Like bjk said, why can't they be enjoyed by all without having to PROVE the connection with the Koran/Islamic tradition etc.

Please read my first few contributions on this board and tell me if you have further issues with it; I await your reply. Thanks.

they are showing march 23 military parade. with people finding fooditems and gasoline beyond their reach, this waste of gas on jets and vehicles for show is a disgrace. in the US, July 4 in DC has none of this expensive display of military hardware - only a parade with school bands and fireworks.

i hope the new government takes a hard look at wasteful military expenditures. only then will pakistan be truly free.

#45 that should be 7th century of course - not 14th.

#43 hamidm: one more time - it's the system, genius. not personalities.

i have been watching discussions on geo and aaj tv - and rest assured that pretty much everyone in pakistan (other than cowasjee and you and mush and his lotas) get it.

#42 akcheema: i find your fascination with the private life of a man who lived in the 14th century AD to be awe-inspiring.

Guess what the gossip has been about Queen Nefertiti and her bro? And may i recomment your getting further jollies out of studing the life and times of Oedipius? And while you are at it, check out what Lucretia and her pop the pope were up to after the pope's working hours were over. And of course you could always visit india to see woman-dog weddings (reported in the press, I am not making this up), women flocking to worship the x-rated god.

You see - the rest of the world is not as civilized as those Aussies down under. Although I suspect the platypus is the result of an aussie farmer getting familiar with his duck..

The article is most interesting and enlightening. Generally speaking, we need to focus more on the future than the past.

It is unfortunate that we of the subcontinent have walked away from an important part of our common heritage which books like the Hamzanama represent.

(Note to self: must make sure to visit the Freeer-Sackler galleries at the next possible chance.)

Re: # 40

tahmed,

.... so you think this is the dawn of a new era ? ........ i suggest you should listen to cowasjee - he has been around longer than even you and he says, "yeh sala sub chore hai" .....i think the cranky old fool is senile and it is time to put him out of his misery, but he does make a good point here ..... the more things change the more they remain the same - stay tuned for the next episode in this continuing saga ...

Re: # 41; treetop: Shame on you for asking me to do the dirty work FOR you! How dare you attempt to cast doudt on the chastity of our favourite "Umm-ul-momineen"! Shame on you again; you will burn in eternal hell!

Here are a few excerpts (Islamic references are from the Quran or Tabai/Ibn-Ishaq that I am going through on Zeemax bhai's learned recommendation. Before we say any more, what is your take on a young, perhaps attractive, adolescent girl, her fantacies and desires, when she is lumbered with a 50 odd year old man who, in all probability can't even get it going!, would have done at any time in history. Here we go:

[Islam's founder routinely made up Qur'an scripture to suit his agenda. However, there was a glimmer of light in this story. Aisha knew better. That's why she condemned Muhammad the moment he revealed the 24th surah, a "divine" revelation inspired by infidelity. It's called "The Criterion." Qur'an 24:1 "(This is) a surah which We have revealed and made obligatory and in which We have revealed clear communications that you may be mindful. For the woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication, flog each of them with a hundred stripes. Let not compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by Allah. And let a party of the Believers witness their punishment." For Muhammad to avoid having the lash applied to him, he had to have his god condone polygamy (which is adultery in all sane religions and societies), as well as pedophilia (which is what is being approved here), incest (approved earlier in the 33rd surah), unwed sex with concubines (which is fornication) and sex with slaves (which is rape).

That said, it was time for a situational scripture. Muhammad's plaything had been accused of adultery, but in order that her services might continue to arouse him, this Qur'anic surah was conveniently revealed. Qur'an 24:4 "And those who launch a charge against chaste women, and produce not four witnesses (to support their allegations), flog them with eighty stripes; and reject their evidence ever after: for such men are wicked transgressors." Aisha had but three accusers. How fortuitous.

Now that the witnesses have been punished and the perpetrators exonerated, Muhammad put Muslim women in their place - in submission to men. Qur'an 24:6 "And for those who launch a charge against their wives, accusing them, but have no witnesses or evidence, except themselves; let the testimony of one of them be four testimonies, (swearing four times) by Allah that he is the one speaking the truth. And the fifth (oath) that they solemnly invoke the curse of Allah on themselves if they tell a lie." That pretty much sums up the plight of Islamic women. If their husbands say that they are bad four times, they are as good as dead. Men don't need evidence.

Returning to Muhammad's predicament, we find another series of verses that are senseless without the context of the Hadith. And within their context, they are petty and vengeful, focused on the desires of the Qur'an's author. The sheer volume of these verses should tell you all you need to know about his priorities. Qur'an 24:11 "Those who brought forward the lie are a body among you: but think it not an evil to you; on the contrary, it is good for you: to every man among them (will come the punishment) of the sin he earned, and for him who took the lead in the slander, his will be an awful doom. Why did not the believers, when you heard of the affair, put the best construction on it in their minds and say, 'This is an obvious lie?' Why did they not bring four witnesses to prove it? Since they produce not witnesses, they are liars in the sight of Allah. Were it not for His mercy a grievous penalty would have seized you in that you rushed glibly into this affair. You received it on your tongues, and said out of your mouths things of which you had no knowledge; and you thought it to be a light matter, while it was most serious in the sight of Allah, a grave offense. And why did you not, when you heard it, say? 'It is not right of us to speak of this: this is a most serious slander, an awful calumny!' Allah does admonish you, that you may never repeat such, if you are Believers. And Allah makes clear the communications. Allah is the Knower, Wise. Those who love scandal to be broadcast among the Believers will have a painful punishment in this life and the hereafter."

How is it possible that a book allegedly written before the world began could focus so intently on a child accused of fornication and yet say nothing about the indiscretion that prompted the infidelity? Aisha was upset because Muhammad purchased - with money he "earned" selling children into slavery - sex with an alluring slave. It's obvious Ibn Ishaq, the prophet's earliest and most trusted biographer, and Tabari, the first Islamic historian, were bothered too. And that's why they said: Ishaq:493 "According to a man I do not suspect, and others who contributed parts of the story, a report has been assembled for you based upon what people have told me in regards to the account of Aisha's story about herself, when the authors of the lie said about her what they said." In other words, the same sources who have brought us the Hadith and Qur'an were witnesses against Aisha and thus witnesses against Muhammad and the Qur'an].

The truth is perhaps only known to Miss Aisha herself, the Habshi in question or Allah Mian perhaps.....Wallahu Aalam....

Akcheema,
I do not have an indepth knowledge of early islamic history,i will appreciate if you or someone else can shed some light on the incidence of Ayesha disappearing with some habshi.Was it just a rumour?

hamidm #36 gillani refused the "rising sun" offer to leave PPP and join the lotas in parliament despite the standard bullying of musharraf. while you and i were wasting time on chowk, he was put in jail for refusing to "cooperate" in musharraf's illegal rule. the things he was charged with would be funny if this was a theater and not real life - too much use of the telephone and cars while speaker of the house, giving jobs to 250 people in the government!!. Even these charges were subsequently thrown out of court. and he is a product of st. mary's in multan. so he cant be all bad.

btw - i see that tribal leaders in fata have joined together to declare the taliban non-muslim. maybe you should hold the nukes you were proposing for people of fata.

Re: # 38

Apologies: the last line should read

"Zeemax has made it clear that there is NO CONTRADICTION between the above-mentioned tales and the Koran/Islam!

Re: No: 32: Eklavya bhai,

Also, I forgot to mention that the same part of the world where a lot of these tales seem to emenate, there are a lot of mythological characters etc based on Mohammed himself; even now you can find pictures, with full facial features, of Mohammed, Ali and the rest of the clan displayed and sold in bazaars in Iran. These were all originally created in the middle ages as well; perhaps that correlates well with Zeemax's current version of Islam as well! "Walla-hu-aalam..."!

The Arabian Nights starts with Schehrzaad, the newly wed bride (also the daughter of the prime minister) of the King/Amir, telling him a story a night to prolong her life. The King was fed up with his ex(previously executed!)-wives infedility, and basically has a virgin a night and then has her killed in the morning, til he ran out of eligible women in his kingdom; so the prime minister's daughter (Shehrzaad) was the next "choice".

I am glad Zeemax has already made it clear that he finds NO CONTRADICTION between the above and the stated collection of tales!

Re: # 32; Eklavya
Thanks. I am not sure where the inspiration from Koran came from and how you managed to make the connection; I suppose that is what fairytales can do to you! I reckon the similarity with the Koran ends there perhaps!

Don't think too high of Pakis and too low of your Indian friends; there is very little between them in fact. Some of the Hindu creation myths are fascinating but I haven't had a chance to read the mythology in detail. Some books that might fascinate you too that I'd recommend them strongly are by Karen Armstrong, "The History of God" and "the Battle for God".

Like I said, if Islam (Arabian Nights) allows "high-breasted virgins" to have almost pornographic displays of passion with "black slaves" in peace time, bring it on!! Might make a refereshing change. Just to clarify, the virgins were ALL from "shurafa families including Royalty" in case of the arabian nights; perhaps refuting Zeemax's theory of ONLY the "murtid" women "prostituting" themselves!! May be he can clarify.....

Re: # 35

tahmed,

.... please wake me up when this 'glorious revolution' is complete and william and mary ascend the throne in islamabad ....... for now, i guess we have to make do with the archduke of multan, makhdoom yousaf raza gilani (ra) ....... the other archduke, makhdoom amin fahim of sindh, is not a happy camper and if he could get the duke of karachi to back him him he might try and raise an army to march on islamabad ....... but the duke of karachi, altaph bhai who is in exile in london, has thrown his support behind the king of dubai, asif zardari ..... it also seems that le dauphin bilawal, has made his way from oxford to islamabad to do show support for king asif ........ with all of this, it seems that the present monarch is not in any real danger unless the king's party and the army turns on him ....... the navy is still busy with clearing the rubble in lahore .......

hamidm: i guess i was too circumpspect. Let me be blunt then:

Discussing ancient books (per this article) at a time when a real life Glorious Revolution is underway in Pakistan is like discussing cricket while engaged in sex.

#32 Posted by Eklavya,

I see you noticed the guy with the biggest 'Gurz'in #17 who's defeated and joins Hamza's army ...

Is it really such a 'fairy tale'? LoL!

Re: # 28

tahmed,

.... you are really loosing it ........ what does holbrooke have to do with the prophet's uncle and the fairies of koh-i-kaaf .......... your obsession with mushy is getting just as bad as mad masadi's obsession with the us elite ....... are you saying that holbrooke thinks mushy is hamza's reincarnation - you will have to ask eklavya about this possibility ........

zee, cheema ji probably understands that! :)

I was just floored by the beauty and the brevity of the expression whose meaning we know so well: of ruling the world with the help of a single 'army of partners,' in which all vanquished and the defeated join the SAME army as soldier-partners.

This almost solves all problems of rebellion, desertion, abandonment, and lack of focus.

Zee, there is nothing remotely like this in Indic tradtions (may be some Hindu can correct me on that).

So, this does seem to be a purely Islamic imagination and piece of work (Christians might have something similar with their 'march of Christ's soldiers' idea. But then they don't have the Quran. The Bible seems nothing like the Quran.)

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

Cheema ji #22, wow, again!

While the logic is simplicity itself, the details and manifestations and expressions are so many, so diverse, and so rich that in order to enjoy their beauty one would probably need 'a few lifetimes'! Will try to at least skim through some stuff. Many, many thanks. :)


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

khurram bhai, Indians have no real reason to read this stuff, unless they happen to be a crazy bunch like me. They have their own mirror image of literature. Even that, they don't mostly read (Chowk, though, has some very knowledgeable people.)

Just curious, how many Indian non-muslims read this while growing up?

A complete translation by Frances Pritchett is available online at
http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00litlinks/hamzah/index.html

Eklavya,

I don't find any contradictions in either Dastaan-e-Amir Hamza or Arabian nights from the basic teachings of Islam!

If these murtids aka ekcheema etc ever tried to look at the 'system' and how it operates over time, particularly in times of peace and in times of conflict, they would know better.

hamidm: discussing ancient books is like discussing philosophy while ..to put it gently..engaged in the act of procreation. There is a revolution going on in Pakistan. Here is Holbrooks now starting to say what I have been ranting about for years on chowk.

Richard Holbrooke (perhaps the most astute and realistic US diplomat and democrat) finally seems to be understanding what any true Pakistani (as opposed to those who spend their time berating fellow Pakistanis) knew all along!!

Hope in Pakistan
The Problems Are Real, but So Is the Progress
By Richard Holbrooke
Friday, March 21, 2008; Page A17

..the return of a vibrant democratic process ..They have formed a Pakistani version of a grand coalition...Since Musharraf's real power base was as military commander, when he "took off his uniform" last year, it turned out that his residual power as president was largely ceremonial..Another positive straw in the wind is the poor showing of the overtly religious parties in February's elections -- they got only 4 percent of the total vote. In the volatile tribal areas near the Afghan border, where the Taliban and al-Qaeda have had a sanctuary from NATO operations in Afghanistan, the Muslim parties were shut out..But Pakistan..is too big and its civil society -- with its deeply established political parties, its free press, its vibrant and very visible lawyers, its thousands of nongovernmental organizations, its huge business community, and its own moderate Muslim leaders -- too extensive to in fact become "the world's most dangerous nation."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/0 3/20/AR2008032003016.html