The Good, the Bad and the Anxiety

Awsome Article!
And you know i totally agree with you and i am sure you are a very pious and paanch waqt namazi auntie and specially i loved the `MANIAC` part and i too believe that who the hell are they to dictate us.
By the way, from all the blessings we have `not hearing one`s concious and thoughts` isn`t the greatest of all, i mean even for the old man who didn`t had a clue what you(her beti) were thinking but then, when i think about all the oldies who`ve been around you for ages, they seem the luckiest of all.

Stay Good!

I believe its not about Pakistani women being “public/national property” however it does bother me when I see a Pakistani women behaving in a way which is contrary to the “Pakistani way”. I have not yet been able to fully grasp the reasons as to why is it this way, when in fact I wouldn’t even enough that women. However, I do believe it is the way we look upon women i.e. in a protective sense and as something which would reflect our society and culture has something to do with this.

Great article. I agree with everything you say. The problem with ``out culture`` is that people are so horny all the time, they can`t think straight. What really irks me is the fact that everyone frowns upon sex, even talking about sex, but come sundown, everyone is trying to figure out where to get some. The pathan truck drivers and taxi drivers, (I know I`m stereotyping, but it`s true), preach Islam, pray five times a day and then what do they do, they go find them selves a 12 year old boy and get off in ways that I don`t care to think about. It`s repulsive the way men stare at women in bazaars, and they do it so blatently, subtlety is lost on these people.

Now, talking about women in Umreeka seen with a gora, people talk behind your back, and ofcourse assume that you`re a slut. Same goes for a desi guy in umreeka whose seen with a Gori. I was in a Sociology class during ramadan one year, and this girl in my class was really interested in participating in an iftari dinner. One was held every Saturday at my school by the desi uncles and aunties for the desi students. But when I attempted to walk in with my classfellow, I was stopped at the door and very rudely informed that this event was for muslims only. To make a long story short, I did get in with the girl from my class, but years later, people still talk about the desi guy who brought a gori to an iftar party, and of course I was branded the male slut whom every desi girl should stay away from. I mean how narrow minded can these pea brains be?

And I can`t stand people that try to justify this kind of moronic behavior by claiming that they care about you and don`t want people to talk behind your back yatta yatta yatta, they`re the first ones to judge you, what schmucks.

I like your articles and they always hit home with a bang. Looking forward to more.

a

Dear Sister:

I am agreed with some points but not all of them because I think you totaly missed the silver lineing of our culture and religon, why don`t you feel proud that, there are lots of people around you who sicerly care about you. I live in USA for a long time and this is my daily observation that over here there is no respect for women they don`t care what you are doing but they do notice if your attire or act is not up to their ``standard`` they see women as a entertainment tool, but they in different ways, as far as our society in Pakistan is concerned I know you are right about Teasing women things but if you noticed that if some one try to bother you there are lots of people who will protect you, from those people regardless they know you or not. in these days there is trend that some women making to much mess in the name of freedom tell me honestly who do you think are responsible for this mess. Islam gives you freedom as it give freedom to mens but there are some limitation for both genders. Look shopkeeper said to you Baitiee don`t you think he was giving you respect and honer how about western people they left no effort to make (Undescribable) relation as soon as they get closer? sister I am sorry to say that you wer totaly missing the good intention of those people who tried to protect you.

May Allah gives you understanding to diferentiate between good and bad people.

Again sister my intention is not for critics but just to point out an other angle of thought. I hope you don`t mind

Allah Hafiz

your brother

Ibad Tirmizi

After reading your article, which by the way rings totally true, i thought it might be interesting to get a Middle Class, Urdu Speaking Karachite perspective on it. I called up a gentleman in his mid thirties who lives in N.Y and travels frequently to Karachi as his family is there and read it to him (in Urdu translation, I did the best I could) and discussed the article and the issues it raised about Women being the property of men in Pakistani society and whether or not they should have the right to dress according to their dictates or not, w/o perfect strangers unilaterally assuming the right to comment on their manner of dress and criticize/rebuke them

I asked him the question that afterall, ``Aap Unn kei kyah lagte hai ? Kyah woh app ki jagir hein ? Kyah haq bunta hai aap kaa kei aap un say yeh sub kuch kaheinh ?`` He conceded that yes, the men technically have no right to do that, but pointed out that men only do that when the girl is dressed in Jeans &/or wearing a T-Shirt because its not ``our culture``. He conceded that men were at fault in staring etc in public at women, but also insisted that it only happens to those who choose to attract this sort of attention by wearing ``provovative clothing``, and by the glances they give men. I was totally disgusted with this attitude, but he said that men in Pakistan stare are women who are dressed differently than the norm simply because its unusual. He pointed out that as a Pakistani male in the company of others in Korea, he had similarly been subjected to stares by the entire neighbourhood as they passed through, including a trafic cop who while directing trafftic in one dirrection, stared at them as they passed by the other way, and treated similarly in a small village in Germany to people just staring (even peering out of windows from behind drawn curtains to take a peek). He puts it down to human nature. He said to me, ``you would stare at a white American girl too, if you saw her in a Shalwar Kameez !`` I conceded that i might look for a moment because that would indeed be unusual.

However he claims the following about Karachi (Clifton beach area) that he saw with his own eyes recently. He saw people Kissing and making out in public (at night) sitting on the rocks, he saw people f.....g in cars (Sar naazar aa rahay thei - Sar kay oopar sar, in the dark so naturally he formed this conclusion) parked near the beach (after 10:00 pm, he saw girls dressed in shorts and T-Shirts! (his exclamation mark) Couples walking on the beach together arms around each other, he claims people were groping each other in the dark ...

He (Nazar) says, ``Aap ko kyah interest hai kai aap mardoon ki taraf daykheen aur yeh observe karen kei woh aap kay muttalik kyah comments karte hain aur 90% loog wohi comments karte hain jo woh aankhoon say dekh rahe hain, kei aik mashrique musalman larki apna mazhab aur culture say hut gayee hai aur woh ishee leyay hairaat ka shikaar hootay hein aur apne jazbaat par qaboo nahinh rakh payte aur oos ka izhar kuch ghalat andaaz say kar dayte hain. Aur, iss mein bhee un ka qusoor nahinh hai kyoon kai hum muslaman hein aur khass taur sey Pakistani hein aur yeh humare khoon mein hai, halaan key agar un loogoon ki jaga mein hota to mein aap per comments kuch iss tareekay say karta kei mein aap say zyada modern bun jata, Americanized hojata, aur ushi style mein aap sey mukhatib hota aur jayseyhi karpre pehanta Americanoon ki tarha, ushi accent kay saath, aur yeh mallom honay kai bawajood kai aap aik musalman aur Pakistani hein, kahta, ``Hai Sweeti, You are a georgeous girl, you are such a nice, pretty girl, what are you doing tonight ? Lets go out have a few beers, and enjoy the whole night together.`` Too phir aap ko buraa nahinh lagta ! Aur lagne bhiee nahinh chayhiey, kyoon kai aap America mein hai, Western minded hain, Western cultured hain aur phir aap ko yeh loog aur culture pasand bhee hain, haanlaynkee mein yeh sub kuch mein kar nahinh sakta, mana key mard bohat batameez hote hein, shaki mizaj hotay hein, larkioon pey baghair comments karte hain aur woh chaahai khud kitne bhee buray kyoon nah hoon aik musalman larki, Pakistani, ko woh apne libas mein, sharm o` haya se bharpoor aur khass taur par jis ko woh apni biwi banana chayhein oos ko 99.99% iss rupe mein dekhna pasand karte hein. Aur phir un ko agar yeh ideal mil jayee to woh apne tamam burayeian jo maazi mein kar chookay hein 90% woh choorr dayte hein bashart yeh kei biwi mein woh salahiyat ho, itne qabilyat ho key woh aik buray insaan ko aik achay rang mein dhaal sakay.

Aur haquiqat mein 99% mard jo hein woh aik wafa ki packer, sharm o`haya, aqalmand, samajdaar, sali-kay-mand aur bohat zyada chahnay wali doost yah biwi ka mutlashi hota hai. Aur haquiqat to yehhi hai aur aik bara insaan woh hota hai jo haquiqat ka saamna karey aur education aur taalim hamay yehhi kuch sabaq dayti hai kei American style me mein yeh kahoon ga kei WHO CARES ? Mein aap ki sachchaii aur talq haqeeqat ko qabool karta hoon, aur yeh such hai. Aameen. Khudahafiz`` Mohammad Nazer Iqbal. (917)356-5944, Beeper. He doesn`t mind being beeped by anyone for a talk regarding his comments.

I wish some of the articles posted at Chowk wuld find their way into Urdu newspapers so we could have a national debate about serious issues regarding the treatment of women in Pakistan with a wider audience. I love your writing style Bad Girl!

``Bad Girl,``

that was a wonderful essay! I think many independent-minded, strong Pakistani young (and even older) women can relate very well to your experiences. I don`t know whether I`m as independent and self-assured as my sometimes wavering image of myself, but I do know that I`ve spent a lot of time agonizing over our desi men`s preoccupation with the ``chastity`` of their women. My blood has boiled over even the more subtle aspects of the treatment of our women; they are, by and large, reduced to waiting on their men--picking up after them, serving them, and finally, simmering in anticipation of that one approving look from them that will put the final seal of success on a day, a month, a lifetime.

Another observation that struck a chord with me was: ``...why do we have such a problem with complexity and ambivalence? Why do people have to be divided neatly into a handful of boxes?``

I have always lamented Pakistanis` need for unequivocal-ness, if I may, or our inability to recognize or deal with any shade other than black or white. It has to be either evil or good, clutched in the gnarled grasp of sin or aglow with the radiance of righteousness--flowing white, haloed, and angelic. I think we have found it easier to simply dismiss something--an act, a condition, a thought--as bad, rather than to spend time and a little cerebral activity on questions such as why or how. And of course, in the case of men-women interaction, men really have much to gain (in the immediate sense) from not letting in a hint of doubt when it comes to their women`s lot in their world. Case closed! is the way to go for them--it`s fast, it`s easy, and it keeps their boss-dom alive, at least for the time being.

Hi BG,

Please disregard my last coments. after going through ur massive replies, i felt as if I shouldn`t have to indulge myself in such a great mess. So please consider me all out.

P.S. FEAR ALLAH...

Whoever you bad girl r, I m very much disappointed on reading this article, which is nothing but a filth, I can only advise u to please understand what Islam says about women and modesty. I also came into conclusion that u only born in muslim family....

Please, do not mix urself with muslim women u could be pakistani women but not representing muslim women..

P.S. I can send u some usefull web sites, if u ever have desire for understaning what Islam says about women`s modesty.

Great Articles Bad Girl. I liked all of them. Keep writing.

Vinay

lreddy@scf.usc.edu

Re Exile

I guess you answered one of my questions! :)

Dear Mr. Shahid Khan:

Please forgive me for not replying sooner. I was not trying to be rude.

You made an elaborate statement which repeats, over and over, your strong and sincere beliefs. I respect your faith and reaffirm that I condone the “kinder, gentler Islam” which you promote. However, I do have a problem. You simply evaded my direct challenges to your claim that classical Islam preaches equality among men and women. I gave references from the Quran which clearly indicate otherwise. I also gave some other Quranic references which show that some portions of the Quran don’t stand up to scrutiny.

You simply avoided answering any of those points. Instead, you went on and on and on about how perfect and wonderful this and that is in your faith. I have no trouble with what you may choose to believe in but I do take exception to your subtle implication that I made claims out of ignorance and misinterpretation. If you are implying that the Quran does not say the things I pointed out then, sir, you simply have not studied your Quran.

Since I do not understand Arabic, I can only rely on translations. I always look at various translations and make allowance for the tiny variations among them. The English translation I follow are those of (1)Yousaf Ali and (2) Picthal. I have, in years past, also followed Urdu translations of (1) Maulana Azad and (2) Maulana Maudoudi. I assure you that what I referred to in my “Islam bashing” message is not a figment of my imagination as you seem to conveniently explain it away. Please re-read my previous message and you will see the specific points I raised against the notion that EVERY WORD of the Quran is ALLAH’s WORD. IMHO some passages of the Quran clearly fall far short.

There is another excellent article about the Quran on the main chowk. I shall submit my question there also. Perhaps you may wish to carry this debate to that venue as it was really a digression under here.

respectfully...SR

RE: Zareeen,

``...........whereas a woman is the real architect of the family.......`` Bibi, I was simply acknowledging the fact that a woman`s role is much more vital in grooming the kids and taking care of family. I never implied that women should be deprived of education or freedom. Islam makes seeking knowldege obligatory on every Muslim. Freedom that women enjoy in Islam is unparalleled (please do not blame Islam if Men in our society exploit Women).

Both Men and Women have basic responsibilities and then there are others that need to be shared.
Despite so much advancement, roles of Men and Women can not be reversed. As mentioned earlier, men and women complement each other. There`s no such thing as dominance of one over the other in view of Islam. These things arise due to lack of knowledge of Islam and its interpretation. There should be a balance between duties and rights. Islam teaches us moderation and not extremism. Thus, as a Muslim, we should be moderate in everything we do.

Re Fawzia

Glad you enjoyed the article, yaar!

Hey there, Synic. That was quite a piece of writing (dogs). I read some of the other stuff and I think its a mixed bag. The piece on Abu Hurayra and the hadith`s he is responsible for repeating, was interesting and supported by some other material I have read. Some pieces, though, sound truly ``fundamentalist`` (and i dont use the term loosely like it is used in the US) and limiting. I get the sense that the site tries to separate the Quran from the Sunnah and the hadith. Which is a good step. But then promotes one version of the Quran. I dont know if you have read the quotes I posted earlier but they reiterate what Sohail , Saima and many others have been saying. Basically that human understanding of the Quran (interpretatin, in other words)changes and has to change with time, while the Quran does not. The conflation of human understanding and religious knowledge with religion itself is one of the biggest problems in religious debate. Many Muslims believe that what has been interpreted for them as the word of God is the word God. So any challenge is blasphemous. In fact, there are people in my family who are horror-struck if I say that a so-called Muslim scholar on TV does not make sense. Just because he is describing what he believes to be the meaning of a religious event or peice of writing doesnt mean that HE is divine and beyond reproach. Anyway, I am digressing...
...thanks for the reference. :)

I do wish Umair and Safwan would consider Sohail`s idea of ``open forums``.

Dear Brother-in-Islam: Sohail Rabbani,

I am delighted to read your response regarding Islam-bashing. Such discussions open the doors for sharing knowledge among the unbiased seekers of TRUTH. We all must thank Safwan and Umair for coming up with the idea of Chowk.

Like you and many others in this forum, I am also a student of science, Islam and Quran and hope that in this process, we would learn from each other`s knowledge. I have collected some information from the net that would help explain the stand of Islam and Quran as far as use of common sense, and logical reasoning is concerned in understanding the the very purpose of life. I agree with you that not all the followers of Islam specially in Indo-Pak realize the importance of knowledge. But why should Islam or Quran be blamed for that? A surgeon uses a knife to save human lives, a murderer uses it to take someone`s life away. It`s not the knife but the murderer to be accused of the heinous act. Doesn`t that sound logical? Obvioulsy, it does!

To appreciate the beauty of this Universe, and thus praise the Creator of all
living as well as non-living beings, one doesn`t need Harvard/Oxford/MIT degrees (Ideally, education definitely helps. If it doesn`t, I consider such an education a waste of time and effort). It requires sincerity on the part of the individual and common sense. Quran does not claim to be a book of science, history or geography. Quran is the book of GUIDANCE for the seekers of truth and guidance. After a study which lasted ten years, the famous French physician Maurice Bucaille adressed the French Academy of Medicine in 1976 and expressed the complete agreement of the Qur’an and established findings of modern science. He presented his study on the basis of certain verses in Quran concerning human physiology and reproduction. It`s simply amazing for educated and illiterate alike as
to how a book which is more than 1400 years old could have contained ideas that have only been discovered in recent times. The scientist in cooperation with Islamic scholars have identified about 1000 verses in Quran that confirm the discoveries/developments of modern science. Many scientists embraced Islam having accepted Quran as a divine revelation.

Please note that not everything can be explained with logic or reasoning. The best example would be birth and death. Despite so much advancement in medical science, many questions remain un-answered. Many in coma, and on death bed, recover without any treatment or medication and on the other hand, perfectly healthy persons pass away. Another example is when the predictions based on scientific knowledge fail. El-Nino was suppossed to bring some warmth this winter, yet we all witnessed the worst ice-storm in the history of Canada. A few years ago, western state of India suffered worst Earth quake despite no evidence of
earth quake in that region. My point is that science doesn`t explain every mystery of life/Universe. Humans though higly
intelligent compared to other living beings, do have certain limitaions. Without light, one can`t see anything despite perfect eyes and good eyesight. One can`t recognize/identify who is just behind. Humans can reason and use their their intelligence in the domain of ``Seen`` but they have little or no control over the domain of ``Unseen``. The divine directives are thus necessary to
guide us in the domain of ``Unseen`` which is beyond human perception.

WHAT IS LIFE ? Man`s existence in this world and the creation of this entire
universe are not mere accidents or products of a fortuitous nature. This universe,
every single atom of it, manifests and leads us to the realization of a Loving,
Merciful and All-powerful Creator. Without a Creator, nothing can exist. Every
single soul knows that he is existing and that his existence is dependent upon a
Creator he knows for sure that he cannot create him self. Therefore it is his duty to
know his master, the Creator.

MANKIND: Man is a unique creature. God establishes man as His representative
or deputy to govern over all other creatures in this world. He is endowed with the
faculty of REASON which sets him apart from all other animals. Together with
this faculty to discriminate and discern, man is given the freedom (free-will) to
choose for himself a way of life worthy of his position as God`s representative or
to fall lower than the lowest of all animals or creations. Man is born pure and
sinless and is given the choice to do righteous deeds or indulge in sins.

DIVINE GUIDANCE: The Creator, out of His abundant Love and Mercy for
mankind has not left us in darkness to discover the right path by trial and error
alone. Coupled with our intellectual capability to reason, our Creator bestowed
upon us DIVINE GUIDANCE that outlines the Criterion for TRUTH, knowledge,
as well as the reality of our existence in this world and the Hereafter.

REVELATIONS: From the beginning of mankind, our Creator sent prophets to
convey His REVELATION and to invite human beings to the path of true PEACE
and OBEDIENCE to the ONE TRUE GOD. This is ISLAM. This message is
conveyed towards successive generations of man through the different prophets, all
inviting mankind to the same path. However all the earlier messages or revelations
from God were distorted by people of later generations.

As a result, pure Revelation from our Creator was adulterated and polluted with
myths, superstitions, idol worship and irrational philosophical ideologies. The
religion of God in a sense was lost in a plethora of religions. Human history is a
testament of man`s drift between light and darkness, but God out of His Abundant
Love for mankind has not forsaken us.

FINAL REVELATIONS: When mankind was in the depths of the Dark Ages, our
Creator sent His final Messenger, prophet Mohammed (Peace be upon him) to redeem
humanity with the final revelation which represents the ultimate and permanent
source of guidance for the whole world.

CRITERIA FOR TRUTH: The following criteria can best serve as a gauge to find
out the authenticity of the last revelation (the Qur’an) as words of God:
1. Rational Teachings: Since our Creator bestowed reason and intellect
upon us, it is our duty to use it to distinguish the TRUTH from falsehood.
True, undistorted revelation from God must be rational and can be reasoned
out by all unbiased minds.

2. Perfection: Since our Creator is all perfect, His revelation must be perfect
and accurate, free from mistakes, omissions, interpolations and multiplicity of
versions. It should be free from contradictions in its narration.

3. No Myths or Superstitions: True revelation is free from myths or
superstitions that degrade the dignity of our Creator or man himself.

4. Scientific: Since our Creator is the Creator of all knowledge, true
revelation is scientific and can withstand the challenge of science at all times.

5. Factual Prophecy: Our Creator is the Knower of the past, present and
future. Thus His prophecies in His revelation will be fulfilled as prophesied.

6. Inimitable By Man: True revelation is infallible and cannot be imitated by
man. God`s true revelation is a Living miracle, an open book challenging all
mankind to see and prove for themselves its authenticity or veracity.


There is no compulsion for a person to accept the Truth, but it is certainly a
shame upon the human intellect when a man is not even interested in finding
out what is the Truth!

Islam teaches that our CREATOR has given human beings the faculty of
reason. Therefore, it is incumbent upon them to reason things out objectively
and systematically for themselves to ponder, to question and to reflect.

Nobody should press you to make a hasty decision to accept any of the
teachings of Islam, for Islam teaches that human beings should be given the
freedom to choose, even when a person is faced with the Truth, there is no
compulsion upon him to embrace it.

But before you begin to form an opinion about Islam, ask yourself whether
your existing knowledge about it is thorough enough. Ask yourself whether
that knowledge has been obtained through third party sources who
themselves have probably been exposed to only random glimpses of Islamic
writings and have yet to reason out on Islam objectively and systematically
themselves.

Is it fair enough that one should form an opinion about the taste of a
particular dish just by a mere hearsay from others who may themselves have
not necessarily tasted the dish yet?

Similarly you should find out for yourself about Islam from reliable sources
and not only taste it, but rather digest it very well before you form an opinion
of it. That would be an intellectual approach to the Truth.

In making your next move to the Truth, Islam continually reassures you that
your rights to freedom of choice and freedom to use that God-given faculty
of thought and reason will be respected, for everyone has that individual will.
No one else can take away that will and force you to submit to the will of our
CREATOR, you have to find out and make that decision yourself.

One will be surprised to learn that such a scientific approach has been commanded in the Qur’an
with the objective of ascertaining its truthfulness.

Do they not carefully consider (investigate) the Qur’an or are there locks upon
their hearts. [Surah 47:24]

Do they not carefully analyse the Quran. If it had been from other than Allaah
then surely they would have found many discrepancies therein [Surah 4:82]

So religious (that is Islamic) beliefs are not based upon blind acceptance as many have generalised
to all religions and thus falsely attributed to the Qur’an and Islam. This has been the experience of
Europe in the past 3-400 years in which scientific advancement and its findings were seen as
heretical, its proponents ridiculed and often exiled and tortured. Islam has never had that
experience.

It is true that academic capabilities differ from person to person and thus some will be unable to ascertain the truth
of it and therefore may accept it blindly. But again they have the opportunity to ask the people of
knowledge, those who are in a position to make such a judgement, like those quoted above. It is
from the principles of wisdom and justice that when you don’t know you don’t make a judgement
yourself but rather consult one who is in a position to do so. In fact this is something Allah has also
commanded:

So ask the People of Knowledge if you do not know [Surah 21:7]

and He has also said

And those who have been given Knowledge know that that which has been
revealed to you from your Lord is the Truth [Surah 34:6]

This is a clear proof of the lack of the dependance upon dogma, superstition and personal
experience and an indication of the obligation to research, ascertain and to verify in a scientific
manner the credibility of religious (Islamic) belief. Fortunately there are those who have done exactly
that like Keith Moore and his scientific colleagues but there are others who have invented lies and
slanders in order to discredit the Qur’an and the Prophet. However when these lies and slanders are
put to the test scientifically they fail miserably and their irrationality and bias becomes evident. Some
of the common claims are that Muhammad was possessed or was an eloquent poet or was a
magician or was one who was brainwashed or was a soothsayer. In fact all of these have been
denied and rebutted in the Qur’an itself in numerous places and numerous times. It is even more
strange that these were the very same claims made by the people who belied the Prophet during his
lifetime, and they are the only ones that are resorted to today. What a great advancement!

Nay! We hurl the Truth against falsehood and it does smash it’s brains and thus
it perishes. And woe be to you for what you describe (with your tongues) [Surah
21:18]

RE: Shahid Khan (subject “Islam bashing”)

Dear Khan sahib:

You are on the mark about the responses here being off the subject. It happens when someone makes an ancillary remark and someone else addresses that remark and thus the topic gets side tracked. I think the chowk should have a general discussion forum for open debates by broad subject category (e.g., economics, politics, religion, philosophy, music, sports, etc.).

Now to your point about “Islam bashing”.

Your heart is in the right place but you are neglecting certain aspects.

Many modern Muslims, like myself, believe in and agree with what you wrote about the equal rights of men and women and wish to promote the concepts of justice in the teachings we leave behind for our next generation. To achieve this end we are bold enough to acknowledge and declare that some portions of the established traditional teachings of Islam have to be amended while some others have to be outright abandoned because they are incompatible with the “global village” of the 21st century.

The orthodox minded Muslims are unwilling to even hear about “reform” or as another chowkwala coined the term, “reformulation”. The orthodox traditionalists are utterly unwilling to see that certain passages of The Quran have no relevance left in this day and age and therefore they cannot be taken “valid for all times” by any fair minded Muslim.

(As an example, take the verses specifically mentioning The Prophet’s wives and disallowing any man to take them as wives after The Prophet. Or the verses commanding The Prophet to marry the wife of his adopted son, Zaid bin Harith, once she is divorced, and going further on to explain that this was necessary so a precedent is established that the wife of an adopted son could be enter into matrimony with the adopted father, once divorce proceedings were properly carried out.)

The traditionalists insist that EACH and EVERY WORD of the QURAN is the DIRECT “FARMAN” of ALLAH, and thus if you dispute EVEN ONE WORD, you cannot call yourself a Muslim. I reject this restrictive notion. We cannot literally believe this tall claim of unadulterated divine source because that would reflect poorly on our concept of Allah. There are some things in there which one cannot seriously believe could have been said by Allah. But I do not wish to get too far off on that debate here.

Like yourself, I believe in equality and justice and therefore I am not willing to accept the literal meaning of those passages of The Quran which, for instance, seemingly diminish the rights of women.

For example The Quran states that the legal witness of a man is equal to two women. Also, it describes how wealth is supposed to be inherited and in doing so allocates twice as much to a son as to a daughter. Then elsewhere, The Quran states that Muslim women are not allowed to marry non-Muslim men whereas no such restriction is imposed on a man. The Quran also sates that a woman’s menstruation is a disease (it can also be translated as “hurt” or “curse”) and that she is “unclean” during that time of the month. I could give more examples, but this is all I can remember off the top of my head.

You wrote :
(I would simply ask how many of us have carried out sincere study of Islam the way we do about other subjects?)

Yes, I would indeed ask the same. Its been observed that many people who are willing to die for, and kill in the name of, Islam, don’t honestly know what much of the fine print says. They know of the so-called “five pillars” and whatever else they have heard, or read in the Islamyat text book, but they act as if they “know” that it is all true. No sir. They don’t “know”, they only “believe”, and they believe because they have been indoctrinated to believe. Thought process has been very summarily involved in the “choice” to believe; it has been a purely emotional choice. Nothing wrong with that, but lets call it what it is and not pretend that its a “well thought out” belief. The fabric of faith is weaved with the fragile silken strands of feelings, not the crass rayon-polyester called “thinking”.

We’ve heard many claims that The Quran is completely correct; has all the truth and knowledge in it, and that science has only now begun to find out things which The Quran states. Everyone who claims that, repeats it like a mantra whenever the subject comes up in their lives. If one questions them, they get emotional and either start threatening eternal hell fire or bodily harm.

No one seems to pay attention to small facts such as: (1) that even though The Quran claim that no one except Allah can know what the unborn child is going to be, yet every day we see ultra sound and amniocentesis test results telling parents about their unborn child, and (2) that the shooting stars in the night are arrows of fire which the angels shoot at the demons who attempt to eavesdrop on the proceedings of the Almighty’s court, yet we have compelling evidence that they are mere meteorites burning up in higher atmosphere.

Now what do things like these show? Do they show that The Quran is wrong? The answer is yes and no, depending upon how much of a restrictive interpretation you wish to impose on the meaning of the words. If you simplistically view it as the literal Word of God as in a child’s black-and-white style of understanding, then the answer is, yes; but, if you view it as a rich epic work of poetic beauty, replete with allegory, charged with imagery and resounding with fervent rhythms from which we draw symbolic inspiration then the answer is, no.

The ancient elders had a more magical view of the world so they derived their concepts accordingly. We are faced with reconciling our traditional cultural belief system in concordance with our concepts of reality that have been cast in a different mold, shaped by the influences of post Newtonian, quantum phenomena.

I for one am not disheartened by such things because for me it does not take away from the beauty of The Quran. I just don’t believe that The Quran is to be taken literally. It is a body of literature that has intrinsic beauty and I value it as a part of out cultural heritage. It is the crown jewel of the Islamic civilizations. I don’t take it as the literal word of God, yet I espouse its sacredness and celebrate its unique status as the central peace of Islamic culture.

Re: synic

The site you recommended looks very promising - i have just skimmed over the main page and some articles.

Thanks for the reference :-)

Assalam-u-Alakum,
Being a Pakistani, who has been living in America for a very long period of time - having experienced everything that this country has to offer, I can and will understand your point.
Women should have every right to wear what they want. Women should not be beaten. Women should be allowed to work etc etc. In all a woman should do everything a man does.
But saying it and believing it are two different things. Can women do everything - hell yes. Will they - well that depends on what their fathers and hubands will decide. That is our society, that is our culture. Many women will read this and say that I am a pig. Maybe; but if you think about your ingrown ``so-called`` feminism, it has its root in the training that your father gave you.
I am very surprised to hear that these ``so-called- feminists`` get angry just because an old illetrate guy told them to wear a kurta. What will happen if somebody else will tell you to cook something someday. If you wanna succeed stop crying about these small things that others do and start worrying about your own life. That is where you Islam begins, and that is where it will end.

Re: Synic

Morning Synic. I`d check the site as soon as time permits me to go along. Thanx and keep in touch. cheers.

Mak

I just wanted to share the following quotes with those involved in this debate, as it seems I am unable to communicate my point of view too well:)

1) ``…The Shari`a reflects a historically-conditioned interpretation of Islamic scriptures in the sense that the founding jurists had to understand those sources in accordance with their own social, economic, and political circumstances... In interpreting the primary sources of Islam in their historical context, the founding jurists of Shari`a tended not only to understand the Qur`an and Sunna as confirming existing social attitudes and institutions, but also to emphasize certain texts and `enact` them into Shari`a while de-emphasizing other texts or interpreting them in ways consistent with what THEY BELIEVED (capitals mine) to be the intent and purpose of the sources.``

From Abdullah Ahmed An-Na`im, Human Rights in the Muslim World, Harvard Human Rights Journal 13 (1990)

2) ``Soroush positions his understanding of religion within a greater project of Islamic revivalism in the modern Muslim world... He accepts that the modern world is constantly changing, and that there is a need to reconcile change in the external world with the immutability of religion. Yet his solution is not the reconstruction or revival of Islam. For Soroush, Islam is unchanging. Any attempt to reconstruct Islam is both futile and illusory, for it is not Islam that must be changed, but the human understanding of Islam. In this distinction lies the key to reconciling a fixed religion with a dynamic world. Just as there is no doubt that the world continuously changes, so too is there no doubt that man`s understanding of religion changes. To meet the challenges of modernity, Muslims should not seek to change their religion, but rather should reconcile their understanding of religion with changes in the outside world. THIS REQUIRES A CONCEPTION OF RELIGION THAT ACCEPTS THE INEVITABILITY OF CHANGE IN HUMAN UNDERSTANDING OF RELIGION (capitals mine)... While religion itself does not change, human understanding and knowledge of it does. Religious knowledge is but one among many branches of human knowledge. IT IS NOT DIVINE BY VIRTUE OF ITS DIVING SUBJECT MATTER, AND IT SHOULD NOT BE CONFUSED WITH RELIGION ITSELF (capitals, mine)``.

From Valla Vakili ``Debating Religion and Politics in Iran: The Political Thought of Abdolkarim Soroush``; Council of Foreign Relations, Muslim Studies Department, Occasional Paper Series, No. 2

Re: Shahid Khan

Thank you, Shahid, you have introduced a very important, but unstated, theme in the discussion. I completely agree with you that what is practiced in pakistan and in other Muslim countries is not Islam, but governments` or people`s version of Islam. I said it myself, that Pakistani traditions which CHARADE as religion (Islam) is the cause of oppression and abuse.

Also, I think you raised a very important point that we should learn more about Islam. That is exactly why I raised the issue of re-interpretation and re-appropriation. What I mean by this is to learn about the religion from a variety of sources and then use our minds, not some one else`s interpretation to understand and draw conclusions about the religion.

You are wrong, however, that men and women, Muslims and non-Muslims are uequivocally equal in Islam. The concepts and treatment of apostasy, qawwam, jizya, etc. do discriminate between men and women (see Wasiq Bokhari`s article on Chowk also) and Muslims and non-Muslims. However, there are verses in the Quran that do state that all human beings are equal and that there is no compulsion in religion. I, personally, give more importance to those verses and therefore, believe, that Islam is about equality and equal human rights. That is my notion of re-interpretation.

You say in your closing paragraph, ``...the authoress of this article [in that] she promotes and expects others to believe in what she thinks is appropriate. The terms Good/Bad, right/worng, superior/inferior depend upoin its very defintion``

Let me clarify, if it was not obvious to you from my piece, that I am not here to promote my version of anything. Please clarify where I espoused any beliefs or ideologies that I want people to follow. I related some experiences that I have had and ended with a series of questions about what it means to be ``muslim`` ``pakistani``, etc and why people worry about others` behavior. Does that constitute as expecting others to believe in what I think is appropriate? i think not. all i am saying is: leave me alone to do what i think is right and i will happily let you deal with your own morality.

and the terms good/bad, right/wrong depend on their definition -- yeah, so? I was suggesting that people think about these definitions and judge how they are formed and what they mean beyond the label.

Please explain why you think that ``People who are influenced by the environment or dictated by their hearts, in my personal opinion, should not waste time discussing the comments or observations of others.``
Isnt everyone influenced by their environment? aren`t you expressing your opinion in this very sentence in which you are asking others to be silent about theirs?

Re: Synic`s comments

Good morning Synic. I appreciate your comments and firmly believe Quran is the only way to unite muslims together despite of their some minor differences and this again proves the saying by Muhammad (pbuh) `I am leaving a thing among you which will unite you muslims forever i.e. Quran`.

I appreciate your patience during the whole debate and hope to have continuous comments in the forthcoming artciles.

Re: Synic

Of course, I agree completely with your last communication. I never said anywhere that men are free to rejoice their lives crushing the rights of women. Those type of malicious men deserve rather more severe penalty. This is first time you and me agreed on some point:)

To All Chowk Wallahs,

It is indeed very disheartening to read and note that most of the responses to this and similar articles on Chowk appear totally out of context. The contributors, though, appear or claim to be scientists/engineers/so called educated persons, are highly emotional who lack tolerance, patience, and whole-heartedness - a pre-requisite for any decent discussion forum. This forum, if I`m right, is to discuss and debate and not to force one`s own beliefs and convictions on others.

One common scapegoat of most articles about social excesses, oppression against women appear to be ISLAM. Many articles hold Islam directly or indirectly responsible for the plight of Pakistanis. I couldn`t stop laughing on this pre-mature conclusion because it suggests that Islam is fully implemented in Pakistan. That women are victimised because all Pakistanis practise Islam. That poverty exists in Pakistan because politicians are God-fearing and follow Islam in their day to day life. That racial/lingual discriminations are the consequence of Islam. That injustice, corruption and favoritism/nepotism exist in Pakistan due to influence of Islam. Please name one single country in the entire world including Pakistan which can be called ``The Islamic State`` in the true sense of this title. What`s in a name? Be it the name of a country or a person! When I talk about Islamic state I refer to the Islamic state which was founded 1414 years ago in Medinah. The same state which had given EQUAL human rights to women/men, non-believers and believers alike. The courts of which, in many cases, gave their verdict in favor of the non-believers. Impressed with this justice, they embraced Islam. The same state where the ruler was questionable and accountable to public - even an old lady could voice her concerns and object to Khalifa-e-Waqt`s decisions. Islam considers women and men EQUAL without any discrimination. If its male followers exploit it to their advantage, it`s them and the system of the state they reside in to be blamed and not Islam. Women and Men complement each other. No one is superior or inferior to the other. This can be very well understood from the life of prophet Muhammad. One need not be a BORN Muslim to rate him as the ``Best Person`` as there are plenty of non-Muslim scholars who rate him the best individual. Every sensible woman would attest to the fact that in the name of liberty, Men in the West has exploited women terribly. If the women in the East is exploited due to illiteracy, male chauvinism, traditions and wrong interpretations of Islam, their counterparts in te West have suffered equally or even more in the name of freedom. Most women in West confess that if they have enough money to support themselves, they would rather stay home and take care of their family. After all, a man just earns money and supports the family financially, whereas a woman is the real architect of the family. All of us who were/are fortunate to have a loving/caring mother would acknowledge how crucial a role she played in their character/career building. She is the first institution of her child. Islam honors and awards respect to women.

It is nothing short of insanity to evaluate Islam when people follow ``pieces of Islam`` and the state follows un-Islamic system.

As regards Islam-bashing, I would simply ask how many of us have carried out sincere study of Islam the way we do about other subjects?
I believe this is important before one pens her/his thoughts about any subject, Islam in particular. Isn`t it ironical that to study science/technology, we spend half of our life, and still confess candidly that one is not an expert of that area, however,
with little or no knowledge about Islam, we start big debates (just on the basis of a few books/articles/hearsay). We should borne in mind that Islam doesn`t need us. There is no compulsion in Islam. Every century has seen many Abu-Jahals, and Abu Lahabs who know and understand Islam better than many who practice it do, yet they fail to appreciate it. So what? Everyone is responsible for her/his actions.

I do not agree with the authoress of this article in that she promotes and expects others to believe in what she thinks is appropriate. The terms Good/Bad, right/wrong,
superior/inferior depend upon its very definition. People who are influenced by the environment or dictated by their hearts, in my personal opinion, should not waste time
discussing the comments or observations of others.

Re: maTHa

I want to respond to the more general comments that you have made. (Unfortunately, I do not have the time, though I do have the inclination, to research the more specific technical issues that you have raised in your discussion. Maybe some other chowkwallahs will continue this debate.)

First of all, let me clarify that there was no confusion on my part when I asked ``What does it mean to be Muslim?`` (Incidentally, that was also not the central question of the piece - I wanted more a discussion on our preoccupation with others` morality as anxiety about our own, but anywy...) When I asked what does it mean to be a Muslim, I wanted us to think about how Muslim and Islam are defined in our society and why these definitions are problematic. A lot of times what parades as Islam is tradition and superstition and what a jaahil maulvi says. But beyond these obvious problems, can you assure me that each and every word of the Quran`s translations and interpretations and the Hadith are indisputably carved in stone? There are some Arabic words that have as many as 20 different shades of meanings. The Hadith are another issue altogether, with complicated processes of recalling, recording and verifying.

For an example of interpretations out of left field, reflecting the writer`s own biases, rather than what has been explicitly stated in a piece of writing, please re-read what MAK originally posted to me in the replies section:
``She didn`t explain what does she mean of freedom explicitly but it appears she needs to wear (or not to wear) western skin-tight light clothes to provide relief herself and agony to guys, to shake butts in noisy, smoky bars with glittering glasses toasting with white mates to show off her modernization and to wander with them whenever and wherever she wants. The notion of freedom permeated so extensively she likes to chat with shop keeper giving her status (name, marital status, address etc.) but erupts to hear his advice. She raised several preposterous points asking why she is not allowed to put on western dresses, why men and women not allowed to confabulate with each other freely and...`` (I rest my case? ;)

Religious ideology and how it is created and re-created is a social process that is deeply affected by its historical and social context. Therefore, I am skeptical of and pretty damned irritated by moralizings by people similar to auntie and MAK. Who, I am not convinced understand Islam any better than I do, but still insist on telling me how to behave.

I also take exception to your implication that I want to re-interpret Islam for my convenience (I refer to your example about Zakaat). I don`t think you are in any position to judge why I am uncomfortable with the Islam that is practiced in Pakistan beyond what I have stated in my piece.

Finally, I really don`t give a chit if the majority of the 1 billion Muslims in the world or the 150 million (?) Pakistani`s say ``yarhumukullah`` when I sneeze! I am really not in it for their approval. But, I am certainly not going to let one of them tell me who I am or who I am not. As Sohail Rabbani said, it is my birth right to call myself a Muslim and I will continue to do so.

thanks for a great discussion!

Re: Bad Girl`s comments

This is so prodigious way of thinking to stop any lawlessness. One iniquity shouldnt be a cause of another iniquity. This is very ridiculous to stop any vandalism by saying `hey! stop the killing, burning, raping, humiliating or I would show my vulgarity`. Does it make a sense? As I told earlier that Islam is a religion of peace and preaches to avoid killing, destroying or being cruel to anyone.

Muslim men intervene when they notice any muslim woman rejoicing her `freedom`. They intervene when they think their religion, culture, values being ruined. They intervene when their sisters, daughters, wives hanging out with `Blacks and Whites` with utter temerity and eventually elope to meet the notion of their freedom. They intervene when our women feel a pride kissing and shaking butts in stinky bars. They intervene when our `highly literate` women undermine their religion and culture before non-muslims to just take an appreciation of their freedom.

I believe if you would have told the shop keeper of your faith he would have never ever advised you to put on `kameez`. Islam spreaded out by words of mouth and belief not by force. I bet numerous muslims had noticed your plight but no one advised you and opted to be silent the shop keeper become `friendly` and took advantage `being friend` and then advised you. Next time when you visit him just let him know of your religion and faith and he wont ask you any more.

I am sorry to say none of the debators disclosed his/her religious affiliation and didnt elaborate any single reason (explicitly) of their faith and dogma. If you dont want to disclose your identity (even almost everyone figured out your faith during this debate and by your article though) then open a general conversation apart of religion bringing out just common sense.

I really enjoyed (still enjoying) this debate and perplexed how far `muslims` (specially women) have gone and how they think. Of course Qiamat is just on our heads. Has everybody earned enough to rejoice and to face Allah? Still have a time to get on right track. May Allah bless all muslims.

Re: Sceptic

/ *The paths are many but the goal is one;
Dost thou not know that there are various roads to the Kaaba (Rumi)
Your Wahabite interpretations would do the Deobandis` proud, as well as the Naqshbandi Sufis. For me, I prefer the tolerance of the
Maulana. */

By the way, I-95 is not one of them! The sexy and multicultural (and multireligious) Sufi alternative is serendipitous, as it exempts
the individual from needing ground to stand on. In the realm of it, EVERYTHING is OK! That is the great advantage of spirituality,
it needs no carnal description, putting it in
the league of descriptions of the Divine. Having an argument about sprituality using non-spiritual tools, like logic (and theory of relativity), is as futile as using them to prove or disprove the existence of God, at best. An aside: Some people may find the discovery of certain elementary particles to be a spiritual experience, as the particles
are never seen by the naked eye, and a
sequence of scientific belief systems help
unveil the mystery, but these belief systems are well-formulated and experimentally tested
to promote them from ``piNhaaN`` to ``zaahir``,
which is perhaps what makes them less debatable and more easily acceptable.

The Kuffaar-e-Makka suffered from this identity crisis fourteen centuries ago,
when the prophet asked them to majorly overhaul their beliefs. I wonder if they were
as devoted to reinterpretation as we are, or was it easier for them to start anew, and
wasn`t that the point? To ascertain whether a
religion is tolerant, do we even need to know
what this religion is? Sufism is all-encompassing, every belief is valid as long as it`s a link in one of the infinite
chains which leads to the Truth. To assume that Sufism is a form of Islam is to confuse
the syllogistic details. Islam, on the other
hand, may well be considered a form of Sufism. Tolerance, by definition, is not an
issue for Sufism, since their is nothing to
tolerate. All paths are equally valid! To accept one path as TRUE, and to ``tolerate`` the other paths, is to forego the spirit of
Sufism (and of spirituality). The idea is to get closer to God, the route taken is unimportant and incidental (and therefore includes the people with the Halle-bop syndrome).

RE: Sohail Rabbani

A clarification is needed between the concepts of apostate (murtid) and hypocrite
(munafiq). I suspect that the ransom money
is applied to unbelievers (and maybe munafiqeen), not murtids. I will
do more research on this and get back to
you. I guess my point was that Nawaz Sharif
couldn`t pull it off in Pakistan! And of course, the unbelievers (mushrikeen: a misguided term sometimes for athiests, since
shirk is to make partners with God, not deny
his existence) had no problem because
they were just considered non-Muslims (dhimmi). The process which was strictly
prohibited was to become a believer and
then turn-back to being an unbeliever, which
is what apostasy is. Munfiqeen never took that step. They continued to claim to be Muslims without following what was prescribed
as Islam to them, or showing ``other`` signs
of not really believing in Islam (I assume the prophet knew what comprised TRUE Islam, or is this a debatable point too?). I am quite certain that the ransom money outlet
doesn`t apply to apostates, but I`ll research
more on it.

If the prophet shared the Uzbek president`s
belief that he was a Muslim, and he toasted
with Vodka at a get-together to decide how
to distribute the recently acquired booty,
and this happened after the commandment prohibiting alcohol had been revealed, he would have gotten 80 lashes (if not 100).

Regarding my veil (which is not much of a veil since most of my friends (self-proclaimed or otherwise) know me by this name), I am glad that you can read between the lines (double-space zindabad).
I am sorry that you feel I can help in the
``much-needed`` reformation. I gave up
on my reformist tendencies a while back! Maybe what we need is not reformation, but
reformulation. After all the Arabs didn`t reform fourteen centuries ago, they reformulated!

Regarding your birth-right to call yourself
a Muslim (and same goes for your Jewish, Christian, Buddhist,...friends), if this is
a birth-right similar to being called a Chaudhary, a Bhutta, a Khan, a Soomro etc.,
feel free, but if you like your pick n` choose interpretation of the Quran better than what`s flushed down your throat as
the prophet Muhammad`s, just keep in mind that it`s NOT your birth-right to be taken
seriously by everybody, even though it`ll be interesting scholarship...

Coming back to the article:
BG`s confusion is similar to the people who
wanted to know what was wrong with not paying
zakaat (to the Center (Madina)). Perhaps, they wanted a reinterpretation,
which would allow them to keep their
money (some say that they wanted to pay and use the zakat money locally). Well,
Abu Bakr answered their question quite promptly as history/heresay books like
Tabari or Islamiyat for Punjab Text Book Board tell us.

To see people assume that reinterpreting parts of the
Quran, which don`t allow enough flexibility
to actually change their meaning too much,
and thereby annul the ``uncomfortable`` parts,
is disturbing if it`s not done in jest or
irony. On a related note, the fact that Ahmadis consider themselves Muslims, and
are able to believe in the Quran, is because
they were able to reinterpret an uncomfortable verse with the phrase ``khatam
-un-NabiyyeeN`` as Seal of the Prophets versus
the traditionally accepted meaning Last of the Prophets. This was an instance of a possible reinterpretation which worked for the Ahmadis. This inspires me to suggest that
an alternative Arabic vocabulary may make it
much easier to have the Quran mould to our
volitions!

I still maintain my viewpoint that if you don`t accept the Quran as Allahs` spoken
word (and complement it with a desire to
follow it), don`t expect other Muslims
to say ``yarhumukullah`` when you sneeze!

Re: MAK

Hi, MAK. Could you please explain one last thing which I think is a contradiction in your stated belief (that Saima and I have been pointing out)

You say, ``I agree with your last para and of course this should not be happened in a muslim country as Islam is religion of peace and never teach to kill innocent people without any reason. But fanatic people are everywhere and this is the responsibility of the government to provide security to its citizen by enforcing law``

Though, you had said earlier, ``This is nature of muslim men that whenever they notice any repulsive plight or vulgarity being done by a muslim woman they intervene to preclude her which is not a social injustice but according to Islam``

How do Muslim men choose when to intervene and when not to intervene? Is vulgarity worse than killing of innocent people? Or is it ``easier`` to intervene when THEY think that women are behaving inappropriately? Isnt it just too easy to feel good about ourselves when we moralize to a woman, while heinous crimes, sometimes in the name of our religion, are being perpetrated without our raising a finger, or even our voice against them!

in response to your earlier question to whom I believe besides myself.

Well, I believe most things that make sense to me, that are based on compassion, justice, logic, rationality and equity. Not necessarily something told to me by a mullah or mullah-type; and certainly nothing that is based on fear, guilt, shame, cruelty or inequity.

Cioa :)

Please explain. Thank you.

BRAVO! More Power to you SISTA!

Kya cheez hai araish-o-qeemat maiN zyada
Azadi-e-nuswaN, ya zammarud ka guluband?

Re: Mr. Rabbani

Thank you very much for your compliments and I reiterate that I am not a muslim scholar or any religious entourage nor associate with any Tableeghi jamaat. What I say is just a reality (at least to muslims) and feelings from the core of my heart.

Although I am not a theoretical physicist to solve integrals or differential equations but as you may know Einstein`s famous equation E=mc square put infidels to think of that matter and energy are interchangable (famous Star Trek based on this assumption where astronomers bump on different planets by transforming `matter` into energy and vice versa). Then consider another equation (with mass, rest mass and velocity of light) where science proved that mass can travel with much more speed than the light (and now scientists inventing some stuff flying with more speed than light). Nevertheless, these are the binary issues to prove incident of Meraj the main issue is to believe or not. I believe Islam is a belief of more spiritual than materliastic. You got to believe on Allah (who is invisible), you got believe on Muhammad (pbuh) (who passed away 1400 years ago and now invisible), you got to believe on angels (still invisible) but Allah knew that humans are feverish and incline toward matter so for an instance He bestowed His book Quran for all time so mankind could see the matter` and believe on it. All muslims from North to South and East to West have a belief there is no single change in Quran. You wont believe but I tell you once I used to watch `prayers` on TV in Pakistan live telecasted from Mecca, I took the Quran and to pacify my curiosity I compared the recitation and amazed to see there was no single error in the recitation and in the Quran! Isnt it a miracle that people throught the world read a book without any mistake?

Allah gave us rationality but we (can) use only a very tiny part of that (Noble Prize Winners use only 10% of there brain) so how could we think of act of Allah. Allah created this universe, galaxies, day, night, plants, humans and animals He `had no control` to stop the time till Muhammad (pbuh) returned back to home? Was it impossible? of course not He could do whatever He wants but we small-headed cant understand his government.

Even it is very cumbersome to solve Schrodinger`s time depnedent (and independent) equations to me how could I solve this `Myth`?




Re: Moe Chuahdry

`Chudhry Sahib` I am not imposing any theorem to anyone I just explained what theorem I believe or muslims believe. You wasted your time to `invent` those suggestions :).

My dear MAK, (are these, by any chance, initials for Mehmud Ali Kasuri?)

You are indeed a brilliant young Muslim man (ma-shallah), and your faith and devotion seem impeccable. Though you very modestly claim that you are not an Islamic scholar, it seems to me that you are a devoted student of Islam and keep in touch with your ulema. Since you also a scientist, perhaps you can help me resolve a basic puzzle which relates to Islam as well as to science.

The quandary derives its inspiration from the incident of the miraj, when the Prophet is supposed to have traveled to the High Heavens. I do realize that some sects don’t believe it ever happened because the Quran only gives a very vague and indirect reference to it. But I’ll suppose that you do believe in the incident of miraj. If, by any chance, you do not believe in miraj, then perhaps some other learned Muslim mujahid-bil-Ilm will respond.

The Jewish scientist Einstein has spread an untrue rumor which has been accepted by most Western scientist without evaluating it in the light of Islamic tradition. He called it the Theory of RELATIVITY. Without bothering to get into the details of that Zionist propaganda, I’ll come to the point of contention. According to that Zionist fabrication, called Relativity, TIME SLOWS DOWN as VELOCITY INCREASES.

Thus if a person sat in a spacecraft and traveled away at say, half the speed of light (according to the Zionist theory the speed of light cannot be exceeded), and made a long trip and came back to earth after one year (as measured by his own wristwatch), when he returns home he will discover that much longer than one year has passed on Earth. So, according to RELATIVITY principles he will suffer from the Rip Van Winkle Effect, i.e., he will have aged only one year but his children will have aged many, many years. I don’t know the mathematical equations so I cannot calculate how much time this Zionist theory says will have passed on Earth in the above example, but it will be much much longer than one year.

However, this is unislamic and therefore untrue because quite the reverse happened during miraj.

According to the ISLAMIC THEORY OF REVERSE RELATIVITY (Islamic scientist, inshallah, will derive all the mathematical equations very soon, and perhaps you can even join the good cause and help out) when the Prophet went on his long journey to the Sidra-tul-muntaha (the Highest of Heavens) to have an audience with Allah, he changed three modes of transportation en route (Buraak, ruf-ruf & angel Gabriel, not to mention a very long walk towards the very end when the angel refused to go any further) and had several experiences along the way. Any how, when The Prophet came back home from having traveled long across the Galaxies, the chain of his front door knob was still undulating from when he had left, only moments ago according to Earth-time.

In other words, only a blinking of an eye had passed here on Earth. This clearly proves the Zionist Theory of Relativity wrong on two points: (1) Time accelerates (does not slows down) with increase in velocity (thus a long span of time can pass at high velocity during space travel while on Earth its only a few seconds of time-lapse), and (2) the Velocity of Light is NOT an insurmountable barrier.

Would you please share your Islamic perspective on the matter.

PS: Ladies and Gentlemen, I hope you will pardon this tangent, but I simply wanted not to miss this opportunity to get enlightened by our genius young brethern in Islam.

Hi Mac, here we go again! May I mentor you?

Here are a few methods for getting people to believe you ... a collection of proof techniques that will prove invaluable to both you and participants here on Chowk.

PROOF TECHNIQUE #1 - `Proof By Induction`

1. Obtain a large power transformer.

2. Find someone who does not believe your theorem.

3. Get this person to hold the terminals on the HV side of the transformer.

4. Apply 25000 volts AC to the LV side of the transformer.

5. Repeat step (4) until they agree with the theorem.

PROOF TECHNIQUE #2 - `Proof By Contradiction`

1. State your theorem.

2. Wait for someone to disagree.

3. Contradict them.

PROOF TECHNIQUE #3 - Fire Proof

1. Summon all you consider inferior to you for a chowk hall meeting.

2. Present your theorem.

3. Bazooka those who disagree.

PROOF TECHNIQUE #4 - The Famous Water Proof

1. State your theorem.

2. Wait for someone to disagree.

3. Drown them. (This is closely related to the `bullet` proof, but is easier to make look like an accident).

PROOF TECHNIQUE #5 - Idiot Proof

1. State your theorem.

2. Write exhaustive ramblings with glossy quotations and poisoned arrows.

3. Challenge anyone to not understand it.

PROOF TECHNIQUE #6 - Child Proof

1. State your theorem.

2. Encapsulate it in epoxy and shape it into an ellipsoid.

3. Put it in a jar with all the other proofs (one with one of those Press-to-Open lids).

4. Give it to Omair or Safwan and challenge them to open it.

PROOF TECHNIQUE #7 - Rabbit Proof

1. Generate theorems at an altogether startling rate, much faster than anybody is able to refute them. Use up everybody else`s paper and time. Run away at the slightest sign of danger.

PROOF TECHNIQUE #8 - Fool Proof

1. State your theorem.

2. Invite chowkwalas to comment.

3. If they don`t agree, exclaim loudly, ``You Fools!``

Re: Bad Girl`s comment

As far as my concern I try of my best to follow the rules and regulations set by Allah and shown by Muhammad (pbuh) and since I believe Muhammad (pbuh) being the last prophet, follow the sayings of the Prophet (pbuh) and never believe on anyone else (i.e. preacher) I consider myself a Muslim. I sense you demur on Quran and you think there is no true translation available of `real Quran`. You also suspect all fellows of Muhammad (pbuh), great religious scholars of all time and all the muslims since the emergence of Islam and you mean to say that men translated Quran and `ammended` whatever they wanted. Alas this point is inexplicable and beyond of my understanding to respond, but I like to ask you only question `Who you believe beside you?`. If you like to associate with any religion you have to believe someone and comply all the compulsions of the dogma. You cant deny Islam saying `who knows what had happened 1400 years ago and what the original shape was` this is typical feminism who `afraid of` men and their superior rights given in Islam and expounded in Quran and this is only thing which strikes you and preclude to accept Islam as a whole. As I told you I dont know your religion but I suspect you are not in believers of Muhammad (pbuh).

I didnt identify any group or sect who would be propelled in the hell I just quoted the verse and any sect who `fulfils` the `pre-requisites` to get in the hell can count itself.

I am not a religious scholar nor associate with any religious team but only a science student and I only believe on realism and never run after illusion. This world is illusion and elusive and Islam is a reality where you could find the solutions of all problems and composure.

I agree with your last para and of course this should not be happened in a muslim country as Islam is religion of peace and never teach to kill innocent people without any reason. But fanatic people are everywhere and this is the responsibility of the government to provide security to its citizen by enforcing laws (as you can see in Saudi Arabia there are no attrocities like that). This is another chapter to be discussed.

RE: the debate

I am glad that my piece seems to have spun off into an argument over interpretation of Islma what it means to be a Muslim. I wish some of the other themes could be explored, but the debate on Muslim/Islam has been particularly useful and informative for me. It is also heartening to know that there are thoughtful and open-minded Muslims out there, who dont reject, apologize for, or wholeheartedly embrace the religion, but try to make sense of it for themselves, while acknowledging the issues they may have either with the religion (the book, the sunnah, etc.) or with its practitioners. Maybe, someone could do an article on an Islamic theme and carry on the debate. Thanks, ya`all.

RE MAK
Thank you MAK for continuing to present your point of view. On the one hand, you adequately illustrate the issue that I was griping about in my article, and on the other hand, you force me to think about Islam and what it means to be a Muslim.

I want to ask you something: How can you be so absolutely sure that your sect or version or following of Islam is the perfect, the correct one? Are you a complete and perfect Muslim with perfect understanding of the Quran and Islam? Can you read and understand the Quran in its original classical Arabic? Have you verified that each Hadith ascribed to the Prophet is actually true beyond a doubt? Where does your faith in your own ability to judge who is right and who is wrong come from?

You quoted ``a verse in Quran where Allah clearly said some people wont believe islam and would argue and raise several points to justify themselves and those people would be compelled in the hell soon which is dire place to live``

How can you be so sure that YOU can identify who these people are. Isnt it rather a daunting task left to Allah?

Finally, as Saima Shah pointed out, why do people use Islam to justify suppressing women? Where are these enforcers of the faith when Shia`s are massacred in Lahore? when innocent civilians are tortured and killed by the police? when women and little children (boys and girls) are raped? when our so called leaders milk the qaumi khazaana dry? Is it more harmful for a society if its women have the right of divorce or if its citizens dont have basic human rights? Can we please point our fingers at the real criminals and transgressors of our society?

Re: Saima Shah`s comments

Interpretation/re-interpretation needed where ambiguity exists. Islam is som simple, transparent and well-explained that only islamic inimicals strive to tarnish the reflections of islam. Allah bestowed islam as one religion and Muhammad (pbuh) expounded and showed the right path but some selfish people betook their own way based on their interests and still ascribe to muslims. These people and their offsprings continued to `interprete` the term of islam with change in time as other religions and relevant scriptures have been altered.

Regarding what sect of islam (I still persist on one Islam) is legitimate lets see what Muhammad (pbuh) said 1400 years ago. Muhammad (pbuh) once said there would be 72 sects near the day of judgement and each sect would claim legitimate itself but only one would be the legitimate among them then fellows asked which one that would be? `The one who follows me` replied the prophet (pbuh). Now each sect should check whether following the path shown by Muhammad (pbuh) or has explored `new horizons`.

The idea of `re-defining` islamic practice with time seems prodigious. This means islamic practices should have altered with the passage of time since the advent of Islam 1400 years ago. What you mean to say is that Allah `forgot` to bestow islam for all time and He `didnt know` that after 1400 years a technological epoch would emerge and people would demand a modern islam to meet their needs of that time. Since Allah `couldnt do that` some people took that responsibility to show the `right path` and to `overhaul` Islam to fix that up according to modern regime (Bravo!!).

Regarding Iqbal`s equality philosphy you completely misunderstood what he intended to say. Mahmud was a king and Ayaz his servant and Iqbal described equality with perspective of well off and poor people and not men-men equality, however this reflects how our women always think of `being deprived` or superiority of men. Nevertheless, superiority of men is testified in Quran and if you read Quran (if you believe on that) then open chapter 5 and verse 34 where you see Allah clearly declared that women have been subjugated so that they comply their men and take care of their belongings.

This is evident that Allah didnt send any woman prophet among 124,000 prophets, no women has led prayers in any time, no women angel and no women led in Ghazwas (jehad). Similarly man has been considered more reliable than woman and therefore two women witnesses equal to one one man`s (chapter 1 verse 281). No matter whether women have more amount of rationality or `shaoor` than men
facts are given in Quran and despite of that some muslim westernized women insist on their notion of `freedom` and `equality` without (or with) knowing the dire consequences.

I would say `Islamists` (strange term to me but I guess means believers of Muhammad (pbuh) ) describe what Quran says and quoted by Muhammad (pbuh). This is is nature of muslim men that whenever they notice any repulsive plight or vulgarity being done by a muslim woman they intervene to preclude her which is not a social injustice but according to Islam.

Re: The reinterpretation of Islam (the debate so far)

The interesting thing is that re-interpretation is considered by each sect as legitimate in the name of True Islmaic Values. In this situation an objective judgement is impossible and it is a matter of opinion who thinks which sect is more legitimate. Mr/Ms MAk should also pay attention to the interesting fact that most of the interpretation/re-interpretation revolves around secondary issues. That the fundamental five tenets of Islam remain a point of consistency between all types of Islam.

The idea of re-defining Islamic `practice` to social institutions is valid and has been expounded by many scholars and philosophers other than Badgirl. One of those is Allama Iqbal who said:

Kya kaha? ``bahre-musalmaan hai faqt waada-e-hoor``,
Shikwa beja bhi kare koi to lazim hai shaoor!

In Jawab-e Shikwa, Iqbal receives the answer upon questioning Islam that if anyone alleges that Islam is about Heavan alone and inactive passive obeisance is all it takes to get the proverbial 4 houris than he should at least think a little bit. It is clear that mindless ritual is an insult to Islam.

Let us also remember that Islam is about spiritual equality:

``Eik hi saf mein khare ho gaye mahmud-o-ayaz,
Na koi banda raha aur na koi banda nawaz``

Both mahmud and ayaz stand in the same row alike
No one is inferior and no-one superior

Perhaps some-one here will iterate that this `equality` is about men only. I don`t think so. The reason is because I believe in merit for the sake of merit and also the fact women have `shaoor`. If nature intended us to be less rational/less able,there would not be so many talented women out there. I think controlling women in the name of so-called morality is social injustice.

A question for Mr Mak is ``why is it that Islam is most quoted by the `Islamists` when it come to subjugating women?`` In other areas, life goes on. Interest is termed mark-up and we offer rates of return competing with the world on our debt instruments/demand accounts etc etc. Why is an equivalent right of divorce so rare? Surely, it is the vested interests of our men and not the fault of Islam.

Iqbal also said:

``Shor hai ho gaye duniya se musalmaan naabod,
Hum ye kahte hain ke the kahin Muslim Maujood?``

There is a great noise that true Muslims have vanished from the Earth
I say, were they ever there?

and,

Zamaane ke andaaz badle gaye;
Naya raag hai, saaz badley gaye

The times have changed their style
there is a new music, the instruments have changed

Re: Synic`s comments

The definition of muslim around the globe is intact since the birth of Islam and I think you are well aware of the five pillars of Islam. In Quran Allah clearly declared Muhammad (pbuh) as the last prophet and whoever declines to believe him is infidel (very simple to understand isnt it). What does it mean? Believe Muhammad (pbuh) as the last prophet and comply all of his sayings without any demur and strictures if you do you are muslim if you dont you`re non-muslim. But as the time passed some stern people within muslims who were delittante to `enjoy` their lives despounded with the `severe` boundaries of islam and started to raise points within islamic rules to make some room to get `relief` themselves. They prevalented their own ludicrous rules beyond the realm of islam and piffled against the `strict` redulations of islam. They `invented` their self-made dogma and religious emissaries and spreaded out to persuade people of vulnerable doctrines towards `freedom` who welcomed those malicious people and their prodigious notions fervently. There is no sects, no divisions in Islam, Islam has been the only one religion Believe it or Leave it, one way or another dont hang between muslim and infidel. At this point I remember a verse in Quran where Allah clearly said some people wont believe islam and would argue and raise several points to justify themselves and those people would be compelled in the hell soon which is dire place to live. May Allah bless all muslims.

RE: maTha (Thu Jan 29 10:11:20 1998)

* * *
...claiming to be a ``Muslim,`` ... depending on ...their Shajra-e-nasab ...our ``other`` heritages are pretty important (and active) too! Our identity as Pakistanis in diaspora is very much altering every day.
* * *

Yes, we do have rather complex and multifarious identities, of which being muslim is an integral (though not exclusive, or even predominant) part. Besides being a muslim (by birth), I consider myself a son of the Punjab, a social product of the quasi-westernized urban middle class of erstwhile-Pakistan (my premise being that the original country NO LONGER exists, toady’s Pakistan being a sham), and a Naturalized American of Indian origin. (The word “Indian” here is taken generically. India was the name coined by the ancient west, for all the lands that lay beyond the river Indus. Thus, technically speaking, the so-called Pakistan has a greater claim to the name “India”, than does Hindustan. Of course, tradition has taken root and no one is likely to heed to this logical suggestion regarding nomenclature.)


* * *
The Uzbek president`s belief of being a Muslim without believing in God makes a nice
anecdote but I wouldn`t stress it as a tribute to Islam`s open-mindedness.

Imagine what would have happened to him in Medina in the early days of Islamic glory? Are we promoting the munafiqeen? :)
* * *

The anecdote is indeed interesting. In the same article I also read that he started the meeting (it was an informal meeting with a delegation from Iran) by raising a toast of vodka... “to the unity of the Islamic world”. The ayatollahs must not have been too amused.

He would probably have done all right in the early days of Islam, depending upon how far back in time you transported him. If you took him to the early Medina days prior to the conquest of Mecca, his fate would have depended on whether or not anyone showed up with ransom to pay Mohammed in exchange for his release. For that is what was done to captured non-believers. The fact that he acknowledged being a muslim, yet denies belief in Allah would not necessarily have cost him his life as you seem to imply. That noble practice began afterwards. In early Medina days “ransom” money usually got you off the hook. Abbas, who was Mohammed’s uncle, along with his two nephews, Aqil and Nawfal, was a captive in Medina (after Badr), and even though he vehemently claimed to be a muslim the Prophet refused to exempt his ransom payment. He was told that if his belief was indeed true Allah will compensate him later, however, if he was muslim only in name (as the Prophet suspected) then he needed to arrange payment for himself and his nephews, because Abbas, the Prophet knew, was one of the richest men.


* * *
Ironically, I agree with you Sohail, without really compromising my viewpoint.
* * *

What do you mean by “without really compromising my viewpoint.” Are you saying you will not tell us what your point of view really is and that you will speak with a forked tongue? Why? Are you really so concerned that the Inquisitioners will declare anyone who speaks his or her mind a “murtad” (an apostate) and thus “vajib ul-qatal” (to be necessarily killed)? Relax my friend! Though it may not appear to be so in places, rest assured, that the Middle Ages are long gone and we are about to enter the Third Millennium. Try as they may, the retrograde forces cannot turn back the wheel of time. Reading between the lines, I can tell that you are not the Rai-wind walla that you sometimes try to sound like, perhaps to confuse the Rai-wind wallas. Come out of the closet and speak your mind, you are safe behind the veil of your pseudonym. It is through discourses like these that the world of Islam may see its much needed Reformation fomented by Muslims who are not afraid to think for themselves.


* * *
Dogmas have the same status in religions, as axioms in geometry.
* * *

Yes, but there are several versions of geometry too. Euclidean geometry’s axioms are not necessary if you are working non-Euclidean theorems. But its still geometry.

* * *
....This is what I refer to as calling it something else... why insist on calling oneself ``Muslim?``
...As far as I am concerned, one can be a ``Muslim`` only religiously and a ``Muslim`` culturally only by its extention.... It`s commonly claimed that what makes you a “Muslim” is the utterance of the ``Shahada`` (in Arabic), so where do we put the ``Muslims`` who are unwilling to do so or just uninterested in such rituals?
* * *

Claiming to be a muslim is a birth-right which I don’t intend to give up. Whether or not I believe that Allah is asleep on the job, or has taken off on vacation to another parallel universe, or has Willed Himself out of existence, is besides the point. I have Jewish friends who don’t believe in the gibberish of the orthodox rabbi any more than I believe in the mullah’s bullchit. There are many Christians today who don’t take the son-of-god crap any more seriously than I take vaqia-i-miraj. The point is that the meaning of these titles (Muslim, Hindu, Jew etc.,) has evolved and it is a very medieval mind-set that insists on rigid definitions and employs exclusionary criteria to those who don’t fit into their favorite definitions. Thus you have all the Ahmadi sect of Muslims declared non-muslim. The Shia’s will probably be next. What about the Agahkhanis? If you keep applying such litmus tests there is going to be no end and only the Wahabis will be left (assuming they are the ones doing the counting).

Hi folks,

Read replies section and would love to respond but am obliged to travel on business for a fortnight and am a little buried in preparations.

Thanks for asking and see you guys all at the end of Feb.

Tahnoon

Re: synic`s comments

I never meant anything but to know the religion and faith of the Bad Girl so people can read her article with the relavent perspective and dont go astray.

Re: MAK

``reveal your identity`` ???

See what I mean? There you go trying to peg me... What does it matter, like synic said (right on, synic!), lets argue on the issues.

Re: Bad Girl`s comments

Right is given to those who deserve that. I`m not a Mullah nor a religious entourage but I know one thing whoever repudiates, invents or demurs in saying by our loving prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is non-muslim and has no right to be called as muslim. Muslim emerged from Islam and whoever denies, ammends or try to overhaul the religion is non-muslim. If you fall in anyone of above categoricaly then say so and reveal your identity so everyone knows you.

Tahnoon, where are you when the chowk needs you?

RE: MAK

Qadianis have a right to call themselves Muslim if that is what they believe they are. I certainly dont feel equipped to judge who is a Muslim or a non-Muslim.

First the Qadianis were accused of being non-Muslims, is it going to be the Shias next? and then anyone who doesnt wear a hijaab or keep a beard or? Where does this end -- this judging and persecuting?

Re: Bad Girl`s comments

Thanks rendering me the lesson of learning even you unaware of me. I dont want to be perplexed despite of your impeling gestures. Nothing can be susceptible on whose dogma in dilemma. By the way Qadianis also proclaim as `muslims` and strive to inflict fundamental beliefs of muslims. I suggest you please avoide to publish your `personal experiences` on net as they accessible at large and may prelude to any conflicts in future.

RE: Chowk Watch ``... Hey Monsieur Moe and Mademoiselle Saima, what`s this complimenting each other in other peoples articles...???
What is this the Dating Network Or What?
Kotwaal is watching!!!!!!!

Ooops! Sorry, Mister Chowk :)- Got carried
away in the heat of my passion for poetry.
Am conditioned now to control my reflexes better :)-

Re: Sohail Rabbani

Regarding the identity crisis basis of claiming to be a ``Muslim,`` for natives of South Asia, depending on how long ago in their Shajra-e-nasab did they actually
become Muslim, our ``other`` heritages are
pretty important (and active) too! Our identity as Pakis