They Changed My God

Correction:

Specially, if you are in one session for more than a couple of days, you end up seeings things; and not necessarily, singing the tune.


Tahmed:

If you are around, please let me know your email address. Or send me a note on Zahra_Jamshed@msn.com [I may have some thoughts on something that we talked about earlier]

Regards.

URS:

It`s a state of mind and it`s an extremely dangerous state - I agree :-)

The younger you are, the easier it is to go back and reflect on your past experiences. The older you become the harder it is to mould thy thought process, even if you want to. I had some senior colleagues in my class and I could tell what was going on.

Personally, I find such sessions mentally and emotionally challenging. Specially if you are in one session for more than a couple of days, you end up seeings things and not necessary singing the tune. That`s the killer. Seeing and Reflection!

Try that if you get an opportunity sometime.

Later.

Zahra:

I think we should take our ``negotiations`` to some other board.

I usually try to avoid people who have just come from attending a leadership seminar and dancing on the tunes of Mortal Combat.

Naah! I am just kidding.

PM #277 ``However, when questioned about specifics, they (``Tahmed`s of the world``, per your previous sentence) will either ask to be excused and/or accuse the other ignorance. Very convenient.``

I politely asked to be excused not because I do not wish to discuss specifics, as I am sure you know. Since a polite ``no thanks`` was not enough, and since you now try to be too clever, let me put it more bluntly: I asked to be excused from your invitation to discuss your views in keeping with the good advice that one should not engage in an argument with a fool, since people may not be able to tell the difference.

krashid:

``My thinking on this matter is that reforming Islam is an ongoing and dynamic proces.``

True. I would like to emphasize one point: Islam as commonly defined by many people has become what we choose it to be. If no basis is found in the Quran (as is the all too often the case), these people refer to some hadith if at all they bother to look for a basis. So Islam, as commonly practiced, is no better or worse than the character of the people practicing it. While revealed Islam is in the Quran which should not be changed one bit, and which provides basic principles for introducing civilized societies (to which the US is definitely closer than the middle east or even Pakistan or India), Islam as practiced is in the hearts and minds of people. And the latter I agree required reformation and is an ongoing and dynamic process.

You have at the end of the post explained what you believe is ``prioritization``: Kalima, namaz fasting. These are important, but more important is to know why we do them. That requires understanding, and understanding is helped by open and civilized discussion.

I guess this thread is now pretty much off the ``front burner``. I have always appreciated your basic views which are humane and based on common sense.

URS:

[The last thing I wanted from my post was to win an argument with you. No.]

I never alluded to that. But thanks for stating your intent!

[So you dont LIKE Jehad, fighting, or killing What is there to like? ]

This is all on one`s filter of perception. Though I never uttered ``do not like`` anywhere, I said I ``hate`` fights and I ``hate`` killings. You tried to downplay the intensity of my emotions; do not ever do that! You need to go back and spend sometime understanding the context in which I have used the word ``Jehad.`` Apparently, you like the concept without giving much thought - it`s your prerogative. I would never suggest you anything otherwise!

[As for the ``development of negotiation skills`` is concerned what do you think you will negotiate with Hindustani Soormas who gang rape 12 and 13 year old Kashmiri women. ......Secularism and Democracy? So when Kashmiri lions come roaring with vengeance and wrath of God and smite Hindus` necks off their torsos it is well deserved. Is there an alternative?]

I think the concept of ``negotiations`` kicked in as I just came out of some intense and rigorous Executive Leadership Training in the past few weeks. Such episodes make you realize the effectivity of many small, but petty things in life that can be handled differently. What you need is the orientation, the perception, the approach, the goal and the committment to handle them in an amicable way. Yes, you can become a barbarian any time you want to - it`s harder to attain the humane self.

Well, with all said, I won`t disgaree with you on the self-defense measures currently being undertaken by the villagers. This is not Jehad in any way or shape, URS. This is standing up for life. There is a difference. And life is granted by Allah Ta`ala and should be taken care of. Just like suicide is Haram; misusing the very essence of life is deplorable as well. So obviously you should fight for survival. I object to your usage of the word Hindus. I would have used Indian Army. It is a war based on territory and not on sects and religions. The sects and religions existed 52 years back as well - probably Lord M.B should have declared the state as an independent state from the beginning. But who could trust the Brits` wisdom personified selves, carrying the hidden message - ``Divide and Conquer!``

[No one likes war. But let me tell you this, a Muslim can be anything but a quadruped to be pushed around. No Ma`m. All we want is a right to live with dignity and respect.]

Well, I do not disgaree with your last thought as well - and in light of that I stated the current irony: when your religion is misrepresented as the religion of terrorists and killers than a religion promoting peace and harmony, there will be uproar!

Newsweek`s January 08th issue has a coverage on ``Women of the new century!`` The title reads, ``The age of Oprah`` - a worth reading article as well as some other good pieces. I ran into a Pakistani Woman`s name under the brief bios of the Women of the 21st Century - 29 year old, Amber Khan. She is actively promoting the constructive role of religion in public life and battling groups that exploit religious differences to gain political power. Her mosque in Illinois was burnt down in a hate crime. Checkout the issue and read more on that. There is not a lot of information as the bios are kept very brief, but still it was interesting stuff to see.

[US is the biggest defence spender in the world even after the Cold War. ........victims?]

Have you watched the movie, ``The Seige`` ? If not, do so! Annette Benning reveals a lot about what you have stated above while interviewing a Palestinian. It was simple, but very moving. You would not except to hear that from American Media.

[just because the sensibilities of some worthless godforsaken Pacifists are hurt?

Be Prepared? Yes, indeed. But be also prepared to withstand the outcomes of any haphazard, reckless, poorly thought, ignorant and emotional move. Life ought to teach lessons and not to make mistakes again and again. I am not blaming anyone, but I would hate to see people dying generation by generation making the same mistake. I would also hate to see killers killing generation by generation without realizing that they do not have the power to take away human life by force. It is encroaching the limits of someone else`s court. Well, obviously being a spectator puts one in a different position than being someone in the situation! Still, solutions are thought by human beings - if they care to seek one. Remember Hazrat Khizr`s[My very beloved teacher] insightful epsiodes - Hazrat Moosa could never understand the rationale behind all the actions. But it was the insight and the foresight that made him take certain steps to hit to the bottom - solution.

eklavya #291,

ameen

Patrick succeeding-at-being-embraced-by-some-chowkies Maseeh,

Don`t let harsh words get you down. I know you don`t care, but sometimes people can say mean things here (like me).

Do you remember the purple teletubby controversy and the Church denouncing what the little character symbolized?

The concept behind the show was wonderful, that people come in all different colors, and those colors were not just significant for skin tone, but experiences, culture, religion, and even sexual orientation (i believe the message was there).

I had a heated argument with one of my friends who refused to let her son watch the show because of the purple teletubby controversy. What a shame.

SameerJB

Welcome back. I hope your mom is feeling well now. I have all the best wishes for her health and your peace of mind.

SameerJB # 286

Wow! I hope that not only Muslims but also Hindus, Christians, and others will learn to focus on the humanistic kernel of truth in their religions, and move away from the absurd and exclusionary dogmas that separate one human being from another. The day we stop talking stupidly about my God and your God, peace and happiness will come much nearer our grasp.

PM:

In fact, your post # 275 is in the same context, what I was pointing out. I am surprised that you took my spontaneous comment very personally and JR`s open-arm invitation very lightly.

Yeh Kya Ho Raha Hae`? It seems that people lose sight of their own point of reference if they interact very regularly on Chowk. I guess it is better to take a break off-and-on! Just a suggestion.

Take Care!

PM[270 something]:

Ooops! It seems that you took my comment very personally and negatively. I didn`t understand very well why you took it, the way you took it, till I read your signature.

Well, I would have totally ignored your post; had the signature not been there :-) Take it easy! OK! If you thought I was being condescending to you because of your faith, you mistook it. I was born and bred in Catholic Schools - with lots of strict nuns and only Christian Teachers; in fact, only one Muslim[Shia-ite Teacher] who taught Islamiyat. And I have great regard, love and respect for all of them. I do not need to write anything after that.

I just found your note to JR very humorous and JR`s response to you equally humorous - kind of assuring you of something. That`s it :-)!

By the way, I do not like your way of expression that`s why I do not read your posts. There are too many pauses and I have a hard time to capture the flow because of the pauses. So, I have a reason to ignore thy ``coated posts!``


Take Care and Time Out!


PS: Do not divert and distract the course of my thoughts. Thanks.

JR #264 On ``Hindu religious killings``, as long as you consider it murder, and no different then murder on any other pretext (let me borrow your lines here: please say yes or no so we are clear on this point, not maybe) then we can agree on this point and move on. Dont elevate these murders by calling them ``Hindu religious killings``, since no religion should be associated with such killings.

You continue to believe that Islam condones such murders, and here we can agree to disagree (unless you are a muslim and plan to use this as a pretext to kill). I am sure the people who killed Gandhi or the missionary and his boys claimed they had the backing of Hinduism for this: I could listen to them and say that Hinduism condones such crimes, but I do not believe for moment (even without having studied the Hindu holy books) that any religion that attracts such a vast following can harbor such evil. You may similarly chose to define Islam as what the Quran says, or what bloodthirsty people say. But that is not the religion that was conveyed to mankind by our Holy Prophet.

``Whether you agree or not, young Muslim minds are taught the exact verses I quoted you to go out and put bullets in people of other faiths. Is this not religious sanction?``

No. I have not visited madrassahs myself but have a friend who knows them quite well and who tells me that there is no teaching of the Quran but the opinions of the mullahs are presented to the children. It is mullah sanction, not religious sanction.

``You are the first Muslim I have met who has publicly answered in the affirmative to the questions that there are verses in the Quran that are time specific, confusing and contradictory.``

Time specific is fine (since no one can argue that verses related on how to behave in the presence of the Holy Prophet, e.g., applied only during his lifetime). On confusing and contradictory, please keep this in perspective: Over-all the Quran is crystal clear. On important issues it repeats itself over and over again. It is confusing and contradictory only if one reads it with a view to finding such cases. You had asked me for a simple yes or no, and I had obliged on this point, since even one exception calls for a yes. But exceptions also prove the rule. So, please dont congratulate me too hastily in having courage to agree with you. I have courage to say what I believe is right and what I can see with my own eyes and understand with my on mind. And that is that the Quran is a wonderful gift to manking from God. If we chose to read it cynically and in support of preconceived notions (as both Islam bashers and the maulvis do, as I have seen from ample evidence by now), then it is their loss. People who are interested in seeking guidance on how to live their lives from the Quran and/or holy books of other religions are on the other hand the true beneficiaries of these books.

``I salute you for this, because it is the truth.``

Thanks, but keep in mind this explanation, and you can unsalute me if you wish.

``Let us not extrapolate the significance of this to mean that the Quran is not timeless and that Quran does not contain a beautiful message, but, let us take it to the next logical step - which is reform.``

OK, now we are getting somewhere. On reform: as I mentioned, reform lies with people. Not with the Quran.

``Reform may be - regorganizing the verses that are misleading and time specific and emphasizing the importance of context. ``

I guess you and I have different definitions of reform. The great strength of the Quran is that a book published in 12th century Egypt or in 16th century Turkey or in 18th century India or in 21st century US is exactly and precisely the same. One billion muslims across the world may differ in many, many ways but yet come together when it comes to reading the same version of the Quran. The Quran is a powerful source of strength for muslims. Better to do this: Emphasize intelligent study of the Quran, not meaningless recitation (which is what the vast majority of people I have seen actually do).

``In conclusion, the message of Islam needs to be reformed to cater to today`s questioning, educated ,rational believer. The exclusivism and dogmatism must go.``

Agreed. I have no problem with criticising the Islamic culture of the past 1400 years. That culture is not sacred, and has much to be criticized. We muslims need to stop glorifying people like Mahmud Ghaznvi and see them for what they are: looters and bandits who violated not just Hinduism but also the tenets of Islam when they violated places of worship of other religions. The role of women in Islamic societies is vastly in contrast to the proper role (remember: the only state mentioned approvingly in the Quran was led by a woman; Moses talks to his future wife before marriage; men are enjoined first to be modest, then women; I could go on, but it is getting late and I think you see my point).

``My goal is to bring home the message that the Quran is a guide to man very much like other religious books and that there is more to being a good human being than there is to follow a particular faith.``

Fair enough. I hope you will see faith as part of the solution, not as part of the problem.

PS I wont be able to respond quickly next couple of days, having some things to do.

Mr. Iqbal, sorry to use this space, but it`s rather important... for a good cause.....

I`m trying to help a kid pay for some IT course he`s taking at an SSI institute in Bombay. I need to ascertain the fee structure, and payment schedule for this course, as well as the duration... it`s called IMPACT.

Anyone willing to provide info may email me @ postmatser@yahoo.com.

Please do help if u can... It could give a helpless kid a `chance` at life.

With thanks,

PM

JR #232

The point was simple.

The slaying Ayah are for war.

You don`t present flowers during War.

If you can slay by preaching democracy, secularism and Ahimsa.

What is wrong if we believe that during war we should slay without saying that it is Oh well, you see India is biggest democracy on Earth, which country in Muslim world gives a sh-it to Kashmiris. We are followers of Gandhi and his Ahimsa etc etc.

Why using all these logic to kill Kashmiris. Just slay them because they are against India.

Because if you say it directly, the first question which will arise is does Kashmir belong to Kashmiris or India. Then we will go all along history to find out about it.

So it is simple, if you know what that meant.

Obsession with Borderline Issues

A flood of replies to a recent article at Chowk, What Constitutes Blasphemy?, speaks of an obsession by Pakistanis with borderline issues. Instead of condemning the burning of “The Frontier Post” offices and press in Peshawar, the sweating over the discussion about blasphemy is just one of several examples of the infatuation with religious dogma based society, ethics and morality. Other such examples include the branding of Ahmadis as non-Muslim, rights of women according to religion, Hudood ordinance, Riba-free banking and jihadis/ madaris phenomena. Let us face it. A total of less than ten cases of blasphemy, during last ten years in a population of 140 million does not really constitute a burning issue. An obsession with it is unjustified without any indication of marked increase in the number of cases, which are not expected to go up significantly in the near future. Neither Pakistan, nor Pakistani society is in any danger because of few cases of blasphemy. The obsession with the politics of blasphemy is a problem; blasphemy itself is not. The obsession with borderline issues is a direct consequence of our passionate attachment to the borders (frontiers) of Islamic dogma.

The concept of dividing everything between two extremes was originally a Persian, or Zoroastrian idea that was included into the Jewish thoughts during their exilic period. Both Islam and Christianity adopted this concept of two extremes into their dogma. It leaves out a great deal of gray area between extremes of black and white, heaven and hell, virtues and profanity and good deeds versus sins. Religious scholars relying on traditions, local cultures, Sunnat, Quran, Hadees and Sharia, in the case of Islam, later filled in the gray area. Several factors other than honesty and knowledge also contributed to the fame and acceptance of the work of these scholars. Relying strictly on the four pillars (Sunnat, Quran, Hadees and Sharia) or including the gray area interpretation into dogma are losing propositions either way. The inclusion of the thoughts of most Islamic scholars of past and presence makes it very Arabic in culture, often unacceptable and unbelievable, while ignoring it leaves us relying exclusively upon pillars with no exegesis about gray area.

It is precisely the relying exclusively upon pillars that determines our obsession with the dogmatic borders, leading to our obsession with borderline issues. Most will consider it stupid if all Pakistanis were only concerned with Pakistani borders and not about mainland problems. Pakistan can not be adequately defined only as what is west, east, north and south of Pakistan. Similarly religion defined and practiced preferentially in terms of extremes or borders is wrong.

Using the idea of two extremes in every situation is simplistic and sometimes outright stupid because most real life issues actually fall somewhere between the two extremes. The biggest weakness of such a simplistic concept is its resistance to reformation (interpolation and extrapolation). It is the in-built uncertainty of the credibility of interpolation between only two data points (G for Good and B for Bad) separated by a large gray area of unknown dimensions. In India and China, sages realized the problem early on and over the centuries added new data points between G and B, in both practical and speculative (spiritual) areas. In Islam, scholars also filled in data points between G and B but the limitations of thoughts within the narrow bounds of core beliefs and scholars’ association often with the courts of ruling elite led to devising ideas that were for the benefits of elite and more suitable to Arabs than other people. Moreover, the limitations and rigidity of two extremes led to additional data points (new concepts) within close proximity of G and B and were suitable for a particular time frame only. The biased nature of additional data points and extreme nearness to G and B kept them precise but not accurate for future reformation.

When knowledge and ideas are confined too closely to narrow dogmatic concerns (restricting unbounded evolution of thought) then the use of propaganda/marketing techniques, to enforce absolute and unquestioned submission becomes a necessity. In order to keep the faithful well away from thinking about a middle way, balanced and rational, exaggerated and obsessive controversy over borderline issues (issues which show no potential for becoming truly significant) is promoted by the self appointed custodians of Islam, and presented as a danger of immense proportion.

Think of fervid emphasis on Islamic appearance and dress code for men, a bearded face without moustache and a trouser few inches above the ankles respectively. This is worse than even borderline issue when it comes to contributing meaningfully to peace, prosperity, family, friends, society or state. Nothing but a waste of time and energies that should be spent dealing with other more important issues. What is there to gain from such an issue? Are there problems with the current appearance and dress code of Pakistani men? Not only it is a worthless and bogus issue; it is in sharp contrast to the general traditional outlook. Throughout our long history, most men were peasants. They had moustache much more often than beard and wore a piece of loincloth often above their knees. Most women also worked alongside men and more portions of their legs were visible than Islam allows. All such customs and traditions were developed to make it more manageable in a particular work environment and acute weather conditions during summer and monsoon months. All of this should not become obscene just because some 900 years ago, Mahmud Ghaznavi set his eyes at the wealth of Somnath temple. It sure did replace one clergy class with another.

The clergy class, the Mullahs, semi-Mullahs and Mullahism in general is responsible for substantial part of the blame for our obsession with borderline issues. They are more obsessed with dogmatic borders than the population at large. A good example of this mindset is their definitions of Hinduism and Buddhism in terms of negative religious extremes. To them, Hindusim is nothing but idol worshipping and strict caste system whereas Buddhism is ascetic way of life, abandoning all participation in the worldly affairs. They know nothing of the core philosophies of self-knowledge, self-discipline, vision, truth, dharma, karma etc of Hinduism and middle way, interdependent arising, nature of reality etc of Buddhism. The reason is simple. They do not feel it necessary to learn or accept guidance from any other source when, according to their belief, Islam is the complete and ultimate source of wisdom. Anything contradicting their brands of Islamic concepts is not worth knowing and anything approving of their concepts from outside is unnecessary. They should have been treated like any other artisan or professional classes. They are paid for their services of leading prayers and presiding over marriage and funeral ceremonies. When a barber is not asked for his opinion about carpentry, a lawyer is not asked for prescribing medicine then why Mullahs are asked for their opinions in the areas beyond their specialty? In a free society, barbers, carpenters, lawyers and doctors all have the right to express their opinions about any issue, but to impose a particular set of ideas, they must all follow the proper channel of becoming the elected representatives-to be able to include their philosophies into laws. Mullahs do not mind of imposing their opinions because they think themselves of divinely ordained. The power politics, arms-twisting, street power and violence are all considered acceptable modes of operation for them because they think of it as performing God’s work. Our communities and society must reject their influence and restrict them to the area of their specialization.

Other weaknesses of a passionate attachment with the extremes only are the flip side of this philosophy. When the gray areas within the bounds of philosophical principles are not well filled in, the foundation itself is weak and easy to overturn. For example, the concept of a creating a society devoid of sins (narrowly and dogmatically defined), implies a small homogeneous society, and not a large and diverse one, teeming with humanity. In the past, the uncertainty over the length and breadth of the gray area had led to a different set of philosophies about the nature of absolute reality. Both extremes were completely merged into singularity as in the cases of various sects of Buddhism, Zen, Sikhism, certain branches of Sufism and non-dualism of Vedanta school of thoughts in Hinduism. No need to worry about borders when borders are indistinguishable from the main body. Similarly in the famous eastern yin-yang philosophy, the good and bad are intertwined and inseparable with the elements of yin present in yang and vice versa. It is impossible to argue for amputation of hand or stoning people to death when both virtue and vice or good and bad are so closely related and part of same natural mosaic. Such punishments clearly indicate the wide separation of G and B in Islamic traditions. That is why the self appointed custodians of Islam are up in arms to force an unnatural and inapplicable code of ethics upon society out of their believe in the infallibility or godliness of these values.

A variety of structures are possible to built around core principles, the pillars, in every religion depending upon the necessity of time and place. The keys are flexibility of imagination, desire for improvement, realization of the drawbacks of the old structure, reason and rationality. Both material and skills should be borrowed freely from others but make sure to build a structure, none of Muslims feel uneasiness in identifying with it. This is what is important and not if the pillars are visible from outside or take the center place in the structure. Islamic Fundamentalists, the JI, JUI, JUP, SSP, Lashkars, Harkats, Hizbs and Mullahs disagree with it. Their obsession is with the pillars and not the renovation or remodeling the old building. The borderline issues, related to dogmatic frontiers, from practical life will remain the primary concern for these folks. Their longings are for achieving (or imposing) a replica of society as closely resembling as possible of 7th century Arabia. What about those who do not wish to be part of such an experiment? Not everybody is obsessed with such an idea or with dogmatic borders. Will they be treated as equal citizen of state or delivered with the same punishment meted out to opponents, though fellow citizen, in 7th century Arabia?

Some of the real problems of South Asians were provided in another recent article, Hands Across The Border, at Chowk. “500 million South Asians live in absolute poverty, 230 million South Asians lack protection from disease, 620 million have no access to safe drinking water, 800 million lack decent sanitation, 50% of the world`s illiterates is in South Asia and 90% of the world`s blind are in South Asia.” Although the numbers are for South Asians but a mere division of these numbers by ten will yield a rough estimate of the number of Pakistanis facing these problems.

The pre-occupation with insignificant extremes in the name of religion is misplaced, misguided and retrogressive. It will only lead to frustration, depression and a fractured society because the fervent emphases placed on ideal Islamic principles are unachievable. A life spent for peace, harmony, reason, rationality, family, friends and society is much better than a life spent fighting for borderline issues related to dogmatic frontiers only. Whether obsession inspired militancy had any place in Islam is irrelevant now. Their harmful effect in the form of disorderliness and destabilization far outweighs any benefits in modern large heterogeneous and pluralistic societies. Is militancy a preferred way of securing a berth in heaven after judgement day?

P.S. This post was submitted as an article to Chowk about a month ago. I assume that it was rejected. Unfortunately, for personal reasons, I would not be able to actively participate in discussions for few months. I thank all of you from the bottom of my heart for interacting with me.

Sameer