In Search of the Moderate Muslim

Amit #31 ``We all must work together as a team and keep religion in its right place in our society. If that means that we must criticize Mr. Bukhari or Mr. Thackrey, we should not hesitate for an instant.``

We can shake hands on that.

We must fight the hate-mongerers and religious fanatics where we can (including those on chowk), and not care whether they are Indian or Pakistani or hindu or muslim. They are all the same - the scum of the human race.

Nagnatheshwar #22 Fair enough. I did read the article, albeit quickly and without trying to glean the point from the text. Since you ask which part of the article I do not understand, I am now going to go through the article para. by para. and give my take on it:

Para 1: ``Let us get this straight. As an Indian and a Muslim I feel no fear about the fallout of the Afghan War...`` Fine. It is good practice to summarize the main idea in a para. in the first sentence. But the rest of the para. basically says the opposite: ``...if push comes to shove the Hindu fundamentalists will vent their ire on some ‘pockets’. And these pockets will be exploited by all stripes of people.`` What am I as a reader to believe: she is not afraid, and she is afraid. Which is it??

Para. 2: ``For the past few weeks I have been sick of this ‘Muslim question’. Because invariably there is the clause: what ‘kind’ of Muslim? The frothing at the mouth Muslim? The bump on the forehead but lips sealed Muslim?...`` Here she is telling us that she is sick of the muslim question. What is the big deal? Instead of watching TV she could watch a romantic movie if she is sick of this. No point to this para.

Para 3: ``But, no. You have the conservative, the moderate and if you are feeling liberal the…er…hmph…liberal…unhuh…Muslim. Now this entity has to be a woman, has to wear a bindi, has to challenge a beard, because only then will she be considered a liberal, no?`` I quote this if full. I understand not one word of this para. Perhaps you can explain.

Para. 4: Same as Para. 3 - quite incomprehensible (I am not repeating it to save space). Again, if you understand the point, I would be much obliged if you could explain.

para. 5: ``If the WTC attack was just an act of ‘terrorism’, why is the Indian media not asking Hindus what they think about it?...`` What, what?? Is there a logical connection between the ``If`` part of the sentence and the ``why`` part of the sentence? If so, please explain.

I will stop here. If you provide a reasonable response to the above, I may go back to the rest of the article and seek your indulgence in understanding the rest of the article. Thank you.

Farzana,

I must say this was a well written article. I really liked it. I have a few comments to make.

“But, no. You have the conservative, the moderate and if you are feeling liberal the…er…hmph…liberal…unhuh…Muslim. Now this entity has to be a woman, has to wear a bindi, has to challenge a beard, because only then will she be considered a liberal, no? “

Not quite! What about Maulana A.K. Azad and Rafik Zakaria former MLA, religious scholar and father of News weeks Fareed Zakaria and of course Fareed himself. I am not sure why you think Rafik Zakaria is not a liberal.

“ Why can Muslims not be political, social, ideological creatures in the country of their birth? “

When in the 54 yrs since independence has this right ever been challenged? When?

“For her, as for Bukhari, every group they claim to represent is just a potential constituency -- political, social or religious. While for one the madrassa is an instrument to brainwash children, what the other does not realise is that it is possibly the only affordable avenue for many Indian Muslim children. For a liberal it is easy to lambast the madrassa culture, but I am surprised that when a Bombay based organization called the Raza Academy takes out peaceful protest rallies using children, they don’t say anything. Why? Are these young minds not being psychologically attuned to taking positions and sides? I have objected to this earlier, but there has not been a cheep of protest from our professional liberals.”

Not True! The Indian govt. provides free education in the Govt. Schools and University education in nearly free in India. But I agree with your point that the media has a liberal bias.

About the Imam and Shabana. They are politicians looking for a constituency that’s it.

Well another thing, when has our cultural identity been under threat and what is this cultural identity. How is it different from the rest of our countrymen, are you trying to say we have a different culture because of our faith.

Regards,

Faruk

RE: Reply #: 34 MFarooqui
``By the way, are you the same Ras Siddiqui who used to write for the Pakistan Progressive?``

I`m the same person who wrote a few small pieces in the Progressive in the old days. But it was the other writers in it that we all now remember and learned a great deal from, namely:

1) Dr. Eqbal Ahmad

2) Dr. Feroz Ahmed

3) Hassan Gardezi

4) Hamza Alvi

5) A person who has been invited to write for CHOWK that now teaches in India

There is no way that I can consider myself in the same League as the people on this list. But it was simply a great magazine. Thanks for rekindling some memories and where have all those years gone?

Ras

THE LIBERAL, THE LIBERATED, AND THE FUNDAMENTALIST MUSLIMS


The dilemma “How much Muslim is a Muslims” exists not because how people outside of Islam view us, but how we view ourselves. The more I delve deeper the more I am convinced that there is no bare minimum, I repeat absolutely no bare minimum to be a Muslim. Islam is unique in this sense that it demands its followers to be absolute fundamentalists. Islam is not a buffet religion. You cannot pick things out of it which suit your lifestyle and reject all those which don’t. In fact, it works the other way around, you have to modify, make changes, and conform your lifestyle to the lifestyle that Islam propagates. Everything i.e. all tenants are so intertwined that it is impossible to untangle them. So there are only two kind of Muslims-Good Muslims and Bad Muslims. There is no middle ground. So that leaves us with only two choice-love it or leave it. The third choice also exists, which is to call yourself a “liberal Muslim” and be condemned to be an apologist for every little thing that you do, for eternity.

A Muslim, any Muslim is a puritan at heart. That is how he is brought up or is converted to change himself. The so called liberal Muslims are those puritans who think that everybody but themselves is having fun. But when fun comes their way it is like Gunah-e-bay-lazzat, doodh meiN maingniaN (Doodh meiN mainniaN dalna is an Urdu proverb,.which means doing someone a favor in such a way that it actually becomes disfavor ; just like offering someone milk but after putting some goat droppings in it). So the result is what urdu saying suggests “ the rider of two boats is condemned to drown”.

Then there comes the class of liberated Muslims. The liberated Muslims are those who have made themselves comfortable with drinking MaingnioN wala doodh. They have even stopped pinching their nose between the thumb and the finger. The maingniaN are the simply the cost of living; like death and taxes. Which is fine. It is their prerogative. Good for them. We are happy for them. BUT the problem arises when they act like that fox who loses her tail to the snare. She thought that before other foxes and animals in the jungle start lampooning her, she must convince them about the benefits of not having a tail. So she gathers all the animals of the jungle and delivers them a lecture on how great she feels; how light she is; and how agile she has become……etc. As she sees that all animals listen to her intently she is convinced more and more of her eloquence and smartness. The silence of her audience convinces her that she must present her case to be their new leader. But but but…as soon as she does that her audience burst into laughter, holding their bellies and pointing their fingers at her.


LONG LIVE FUNDAMENTALISM

FUNDAMENTALISM FOREVER.

BUNYAD PARASTI ZINDABAD.

Speaking of ``Moderate Muslims``, it was great to
see Salman Ahmad of the Pakistani-American Rock
Band ``Junoon`` on CNN this morning.
Salman, someday when you have some time, write
something for us here on CHOWK too. It was great
to see you batting for us today.

And on another note the $OB`s responsible for
the killing of Christians in Bahawalpur, a Punjabi saying ``Taim, Taim Di Gal Hai``. Your
days are numbered in Pakistan.

Ras

Re: ROmair

``Around twenty percent or so seem to really like Pakistanis. They hang around with them, room with them, and seem to feel more comfortable with them, than with Indian Hindus.``

It goes beyond that...some are against everything India stands for. Those are the types who will remain in the gutters of India. While their counterparts integrate into Indian society and compete for IIT & IIM slots and jobs at McKinsey, they sit around memorizing the Quran and learning Arabic. I have come across many of both types. I`ve even seen one Indian Muslim almost smack another at a showing of an India-Pakistan..wanna guess the reason?

Dont bother to please everyone.It never works

I don`t care what you say anymore, this is my life

Go ahead with your own life, and leave me alone

My Life





Got a call from an old friend

We used to be real close

Said he couldn`t go on the American way

Closed the shop, sold the house

Bought a ticket to the West Coast

Now he gives them a stand-up routine in L.A.



CHORUS

I don`t need you to worry for me cause I`m alright

I don`t want you to tell me it`s time to come home

I don`t care what you say anymore, this is my life

Go ahead with your own life, and leave me alone



I never said you had to offer me a second chance

I never said I was a victim of circumstance

I still belong, don`t get me wrong

And you can speak your mind

But not on my time



They will tell you you can`t sleep

Alone in a strange place

Then they`ll tell you you can`t sleep with somebody else

But sooner or later you sleep

In your own space

Either way it`s okay to wake up with yourself



CHORUS

Re: ylh

``Why is it that we have never seen one of your contributions get published.``

Ummm...maybe because I have never written or submitted anything?

``delusional view of the world rooted in fiction?``

That`s your forte...far be it from me to compete with you.

But if you insist that I submit something, would you be kind enough to take over my pretzel stand for two days? That will give me the time to write an article for Chowk.

No? Why not? I know you`ve made disparaging remarks about this before, but I urge you to leave your feudal mentality in Pakistan...there`s no room for that in the US.

Shah #24,

No, I don`t expect the Muslims in India to be knowledgeable about the Middle East and I won`t even bother asking them about it.

But when a Shahi Imam in India stands up and equates the war against the Taliban as a war against Islam then yes we have every right to ask the Muslims in India about their opinion.

Farzana,

I forgot to ask you a couple of questions in my previous posts.

1) Why do you think Hindus will only consider a Muslim liberal if he/she sports a bindi?

2) Do you consider the concept of thinking all religions are equal is a cliche worthy of derision?

[why not ask Shushmita Sen about Ayodhya issue or continue asking Kajol,Sri Devi,Hema malini ,Karishma]

Correct similar situation will be - asking Imran Khan about politics in Pakistan, or asking Shatrughan Sinha about political things in India. These stars have entered politcs, social activism.

Shabana Azmi is a member of Rajya Sabha (Upper House), a political activist. As other cricketers in Pakistan are not political activist, other film stars in India are not activists. Shouldn`t she, Imran Khan have a right to say things, be heard?

Dear Urstruly,

Have you considered this:

There isn`t a single person who does not consider himself or herself unique.

There isn`t a single nation that does not consider itself unique.

What I would most like you to consider -

There isn`t a single religion that does not consider itself (I am ``anthromorphizing`` here for the sake of brevity) unique.

I am not sure if you will find the last point credible. You surely wouldn`t, for example, if you believe, deep down in your heart, that your religion is so obvious and natural that others should naturally follow it. I cannot say about Islam, but there are many Hindus who think along the same lines about their religion. We call our religion ``sanatan`` - meaning it was never born, it always was, it always will be. You get the drift?

In a way, every religion is ``fundamentalist`` and no religion is a ``buffet.`` The difference arises when people begin to use their God-given right to think for ourselves.

Regards.

Dear Urstruly,

Have you considered this:

There isn`t a single person who does not consider himself or herself unique.

There isn`t a single nation that does not consider itself unique.

What I would most like you to consider -

There isn`t a single religion that does not consider itself (I am ``anthromorphizing`` here for the sake of brevity) unique.

I am not sure if you will find the last point credible. You surely wouldn`t, for example, if you believe, deep down in your heart, that your religion is so obvious and natural that others should naturally follow it. I cannot say about Islam, but there are many Hindus who think along the same lines about their religion. We call our religion ``sanatan`` - meaning it was never born, it always was, it always will be. You get the drift?

In a way, every religion is ``fundamentalist`` and no religion is a ``buffet.`` The difference arises when people begin to use their God-given right to think for ourselves.

Regards.

One thing the readers must have noticed about this author is that she writes passionately.

Now, ofcourse, I could disagree with the details of every other sentence she has written. But still, her underlying message is solid: we must follow the IDEAL of granting everyone the freedom to say or do anything they like. That is true of every country.

Indians shouldn`t be so sensitive to internal criticism. The real debate IMO should focus on the following:

How can we balance that ideal of absolute freedom against such existential imperatives as the maintenance of human life, security, and interpersonal trust?

The rest, it seems to me, is empty posturing.

shankar #49: ``IMO, this rage is universal for muslims that live in societies that claim are ``free, secular & democracies``--but see the hypocracy of those assertions, both in their internal & foreign policies.``

This is probably true, in general, i.e. people living in societies where they don`t get any opportunity, but at the same time are not strong enough to influence the effects. In Pakistan, the religious extremists demonstrating fall into this category. This is a dangerous phenomenon. It is a powderkeg waiting to go off, if it gets large enough. The best solution is to provide the opportunities to such people.

``Correct me if I`m wrong; but I see the same signs of a frustrated activist in you--esp when you comment on US foreign policy.``

You are wrong on this one, so I will correct you. I think frustrated activists are created more due to domestic policy, than foreign policy. I am quite a big fan of the US domestic policy. It has been quite fair to me, so I have no complains. Otherwise, I would have moved out of this country, long ago.

US foreign policy, of course, is a different story. It is now the most ruthless in the world. There are too many facts proving this. But I am not a US citizen, so it is not as if I feel guilty for the US`s foreign policy actions. At the same time, the US has not been ruthless or even too unfair with Pakistan, so I have no reason to be frustrated on that account, either.

There is however some frustration, on the lack of debate or knowledge amongst Americans on US foreign policy barbarisms. Probably because, most Americans don`t know or care what the US does outside its borders. That is however no excuse. And the fact, that the US media, like most media, unites on a pro-US stand, the moment the US starts carrying out its offensives.

I just returned from Canada, and have found their foreign and domestic policy to be very principled based and fair. They have embassies in nearly every country, the US considers a rogue state (translated: Canadian foreign policy has not been hijacked by Israel). And they have not killed a single non-Canadian civilian in an act of war, since WWII, as far as I know. At the same time, they entered WWII, two years before the US, to fight Hitler. Compare this to the hundreds of thousands civilians or even a million or more, who have become victims of US foreign policy. And Canada is still as advanced and as safe (much more safe) than the US. So I am seriously thinking of raising my kids there, instead of in the US. A frustrated activist would try to change the US foreign policy, I am actually discarding it all together :)