Muslims and The West After 11th September

Rdesikan #370

Thats hilarious! I have to repeat it to some of my post-modernist and deconstructionist colleagues!

BTW, have any of you read the Sokol Hoax and the ensuing controversy? Pretty much illustrates the intellectual dishonesty of the Post-modernists. I especially liked Sokol`s invitation to any Post-modernist who argued that physical reality (as opposed to its interpretation, I assume) is a social construct to take a leap out of his 10th floor office window to test their theory.

Some interesting ideas. Most of them have been discussed before in quite a bit of detail. Muslims definitely need to become more forward looking and educated, and the US definitely needs to follow international laws. I am not quite sure (as usual) what lack or excess of religion has to do with either of those issues.

Muslim nations under secularism have made no more or less progress than Muslim nations under religion; and vice versa. This should convince anyone that prepetually debating religion (which is basically what the, ``secularists`` and, ``Islamists`` do all day) is nothing more than an attempt to define one`s own identity. Perhaps the problem of Pakistan is that too many of its scientists are trying to prove that Imam Ghazali had all the answers, and too many of its scientists are trying to prove that Imam Ghazali is the cause of all the problems. Perhaps that is why their are so few Pakistani names in scientific journals. They are all too busy debating Imam Ghazali. Who cares what the Imam Ghazalis did and did not do?

I have spent a good portion of my adult life studying (and teaching/mentoring) engineering and science. I have met many secular scientists and students who were brilliant, and many religious ones who were equally brilliant. The one point I noticed to be common between them was their obsession with science, as well as their desire to stay out of useless and confrontationalist non-scientific (specifically those involving a stance on religion) debates. And I have seen no debate in my life to be more useless than the ones over religion. These include debates that attempt to prove one religion to be superior to another, and debates that claim religion to be the cause or solution of a society`s problems. I have yet to see a single one of these debates result in anyone changing their respective stances, at the end. Primarily because these are debates involving extremists and not moderates. Pure secularist and pure religionists will always view the other as ignorant and as a problem, come hell or high water.

Despite the many good points in this article, I doubt it will result in anything more than the secularists and Islamists digging into their trenches, hailing their heroes, waving their battle flags, and verbally attacking their fellow man. A much more useful debate would cover subjects like how to improve women`s education in Pakistan; how ex-patriates can contribute to university education in Pakistan, etc.

The answers to the above questions, will not be found in obsessing with the lack or excess of religion in Pakistan. After all, Imran Khan was a pretty secular person when he initiated his cancer hospital, and to the best of my knowledge Edhi is a pretty religious individual. Their claim to fame is their philanthrapy, not their religious/non-religious tendencies.

Professor Sahib: The article does take a bit of a random walk, cutting across the lawn, trampling a few flower beds (oh well), plods through a couple of streams, but...surprise..ends at the right destination: ``We have but one choice: the path of secular humanism, based upon the principles of logic and reason. This alone offers the hope of providing everybody on this globe with the right to life,liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.``

I see that my twin (#8) is also interacting at different boards. There is no question here that among the two of us I am the evil one. However, the idea that sends a shudder down my spine is what if this twin of mine is a Hindu? aaaakh!

Romair # 13

If sac ever had a point to discuss he would have been on our side of the spectrum. By the way I am still thinking about a word equivalent of fundo beardo etc. which will effectively descibe these bay dhangay fascist liberals. Associating these individuals with the concept of liberalism is an insult to the concept. I am thinking hard to come up with decent alternative of the word liberal but their character as well as mine gets in the way.

Nagnatheshwar #3:

HUH?

sac#6, Romair#15:

Suggest both of you get a life.

Jay #15:

Good points. You reminded me of an episode of The Big Fight on Star News (does it go to Pakistan?) where the liberal Muslims spearheaded by Javed Akhtar were taking on the extreme faction led by Banatwala of the Muslim League. Javed Akhtar is a poet and knows how to weave magic with words and managed to push Banatwala into a nice tight corner. Finally, an exasperated Batwala was asked whether there was room in (his version of) Islam for liberal Muslims. His reply: ``I do not understand what the term ``liberal Muslim`` means. All believers who live by the tenets of the Koran...blash blah... are Muslims.`` Pressed on whether that included non-adherence to the Indian Constitution if it contravened the laws of Islam, he retorted, ``So far, there is no contradiction.`` Which prompted someone to ask what would Muslims think (or be force-fed to think, more likely, by idiots like Banatwala and the Shahi Imam)if a uniform Civil -- truly SECULAR, mind you--- code was enforced? Banatwala persisted in making veiled threats and references to the fact that so far there was no contradiction.

It`s pathetic that people feel the need to live by a Book written 14 centuries ago. I think having 4 wives is offensive in this day and age. (Lest I be branded anti-Islam, I think the Pope banning birth-control is ridiculous and rebuilding ancient temples and burning brides are also disgusting.)

We`re lucky to be living in the best of all possible times. Can`t we all use our common sense and make the best of them? What kind of moronic science extracts energy from jinns and calculates the distance of heaven from earth? Sickening!

``Credo quia absurdum est``

Dr. Hoodbhoy:

So many ideas to explore and I hope shall explore them all, in particular, the scope of secularism, secular humanism and the notion of ``happiness`` as a valid concern of the state and the notion that the state actually has a role to promote or prevent it`s pursuit, individualism and the notion of the ``modern`` - and the possibility of degree.

you lament the irrational and criminal act of 9/11 - we all do. Your lament does not extend to the innocent civilians killed in America`s revenge? not a word about them? And those Talib and other volunteers (mostly Pakistani) massacred with their hands tied behind their backs by Americans and their new allies? irrationality meets irrationality.

And no comment on your role in the ideological purges, which you have a had a direct hand in - among the community of patriotic Pakistani nuclear scientists? What of their families?? and all the while yours are safe? You may yet be known, in the West as the premier nuclear scientist of Pakistan - while contributing, sacrificing nothing, to it`s security - but in Pakistan, you will always be recognized as the tool of hostile foreign powers and perverse ideologies, that you are.

As is usual for you, you malign Islam with a broad brush. Sectarianism is exclusive to Islam? Your Ahmadi friend shot dead and all Islam is to blame? Curiously you do not seek malign all Christianity for the muder of a innocent Pakistani Muslim outside a Masjid in Texas nor do you find intellectual trends in the spectrum of Christianity to blame for the murder of a Sikh business owner in Arizona? Clearly, such suggestions would be equally objectionable, yet you invite all Muslims to engage in self flagellation over the acts of terrorists? And this is reason? Were not the innocent murdered Muslim on Texas or the Sikh in Arizona pursuing ``happiness``? Did the ``secular`` State protect the life and liberty? Was it ``secular humanism`` at work, animating, inspiring these murders? A ridiculous suggestion, yet you want as to apply this reasoning to Islam?

All reasonable persons will agree that Muslim societies suffer from the lack of education, social and economic development - yet few reasonable persons will agree with your conclusion that ``secular humanism`` is the answer.

You obfuscate your conclusion that it is the religion of Islam and Muslims that you seek replace with the religion of ``secular humanism``.

Secularism, that is the separation, the specialization of institutions of governance and religion is most certainly acceptable. ``Secular humanism`` seek to do much more than effect the differentiation of institutions of religion and governance, it seeks to differentiate religion from culture and conscience and create of man a creature of the state.



I am not at all surprised that you do not call for the freedom of conscience, of liberty, of rights and obligations of the citizen and the state, of a ``good`` society. Instead you argue that based on the actions of zealots and misguided persons, that society conclude, religion itself has little to offer, or at best, it be restricted to the private. As if the human condition was a private matter. As if there is even a single person who can deny that the reason, we can understand or empathize with persons in all cultures in time and space, is the human condition. It is the human condition that seeks to connect, to ground itself in and with continum of dead, the living and yet to be born.

I would like to thank you and encourage you to even more forcefully bring these distinctions to the fore, so that ever larger numbers of persons may begin to understand the full social impact of the prescription (Nihilism) you offer as panacea.

MUSLIMS AND THE WEST

FROM DAWN OF TODAY

Records of Madaris to be maintained

under $100m US package

By Ikram Hoti

ISLAMABAD: Computerised profiles of all Madaris` teachers and students will be prepared by authorities under a $100 million package to be received shortly by Pakistan from the US.

While the money would be used for a broad agenda to control the militant and sectarian elements in the country, these profiles are intended at keeping complete record of the clergy in Pakistan.

This record keeping has been deemed necessary to keep track of activities of these elements in the Madaris who indulge in violent activities, apart from creating militant groups or harbouring them both for politically-motivated demonstrations and sectarian grouping.

Under the same programme, the authorities would be keeping vigilance on the publication activities in support of their militant agenda. The information network on printing presses and publication houses, both in the organised and unorganised sectors, would be activated.

Professor Hoodbhoy

I would like to point out that remarks such as ``Between the 9th and the 13th centuries - the Golden Age of Islam - the only people doing decent science, philosophy, or medicine were Muslims. For five straight centuries they alone kept the light of learning ablaze. Muslims not only preserved ancient learning, they also made substantial innovations and extensions`` are historically inaccurate and reprehensible.

Your remark betrays a tremendous ingorance of developments in philosophy, science and medicine in the Great Civilizations of India and China and South East Asia. The period you mention was one of great creative outburst in these civilizations producing masterpieces of art, architecture and science. It is the kind of hubris that you display in making such a statement that has led to the downfall of the Muslim nations and people.

Also, let us remember the deep indebtedness of the Arabs of the 9th-13th centuries to other cultures. The concept of the number and decimal system and idea of zero were all taken from India, as all historians acknowledge. All philosophical ideas were taken from the Ancient Greeks (Plato, Socrates, Aristotle). Paper making and gunpowder were borrowed from the Chinese as were techniques of art and architecture. And Muslim literature was enriched by translations of Persian, Sanskrit, Greek and even Latin works.

The Arabs did make remarkable advances in algebra and astronomy. But we must not exaggerrate these achievements, which cannot compare to scientific and technical advancements in China during the same period.

Let me further remind you that the glorious centuries your refer to represent an ARAB achievement more than a MUSLIM one. No Punjabis or Uzbeks or Malays or Khurasanis or Tajiks or Pathans or other modern Muslim races participated in that outburst of creativity. Let us not try and take credit for acheivements in which our ancestors had no part. This is part of ARAB history, not MUSLIM history. When Western historians refer to the great period of MUSLIM history, you must remember that they use the word interchangeably with ARAB. What connection has a Jat Muslim of Punjab with those achievements (neither he nor his ancestors were even remotely connected with that period or place).

So, lets remain Indian and Pakistanis and lets not try to appropriate the glories of Iraqi and Syrian history. Rather take pride in your own achievements, in the glories of Mughal Empire, or in the mighty civilizations of the Indus Valley.

Dr Ali Akbar Poonawala

MBBS MD

Jammu, India

Re: Sac on Romair et al

Right on!

Re; Romair

``...I thought I had made it clear that it was useless for me to interact with you...``

Chowk is a public forum. Once your ideas are out there for all to see, you are fair game. The idea counts for more than the username. Nobody has to interact with you, and you do not have to respond to anyone, but everybody is entitled to pick you assertions apart. That is one more reason why Sac was right to nail you!

Urstruly:

Check out this Op/Ed by BB. I know that you don`t like her, but she seems to be talking sense here:

http://www.nation.com.pk/daily/today/editor/opi6.htm

Prof. Hoodbhoy,

While I agree with what you say about Islam, you are being unfair about USA. Let us take a closer look at US policies. If the US tries to maintain a working relationship with a non-democratic muslim country, it is accused of supporting dictators. If it tries to propagate democracy, it is accused of trying to impose its hegemony and culture. Since the second world war, US has tried to maintain good relations with the Islamic world. There may have been an occasional exception in Iran, but US policies have been much more benign as compared to the colonial powers like England and France. During the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, US government supported the Mujahideen. People accused it of leaving Afghanistan later on, but then it was the duty of the Afghans themselves to form a reasonable government later on. The US supported the Bosnians and Kosovars, to the point that it bombed Christian Serbs in order to protect muslims. During the Gulf War, US protected the Kuwaitis and Saudis by stopping Saddam. In the latest conflict in Afghanistan, Bush gave the Taliban at least 1 month to make up their mind about Bin Laden. There are many such examples.

The Palestinian issue is a tough one, but even in this case, US has tried to mediate a solution for the past 10 years. It supported Israel due to the events in Second World War. However, it has tried to strike a reasonable balance. The main problem is that the US has not marketed its policies appropriately. It is fashionable to criticize USA, but in the end, USA is the best hope remaining for freedom across the world.

``Subsequent to September 11th we have all begun to live in a different, more dangerous world.``

The world was a dangerous place BEFORE Sept 11. Thats why an event like Sept 11 could happen. The years and days leading up to Sept 11 were VERY DANGEROUS for those working in WTC for example and even as we speak we donot know who else is living in a dangerous world which is about to get more dangerous.

Its a different matter that regrettably, for introspecting people around the world, there is no watershed event comparable to deaths of Americans to mark time.

re: sac

``At the other end of the spectrum are eternally confused, extremely verbose and yet lacking in any substance whatsoever are the urstrulys, ROmairs and hobbytys of this world. Their presence only serves to heighten the contrast.``

..right on

Re: Dr Hoodbhoy`s article

I found the following to be the most significant passage in that article.

``Muslims must recognize that their societies are far larger, more diverse and complex than the small homogenous tribal society in Arabia 1400 hundred years ago. It is therefore time to renounce the idea that Islam can survive and prosper only in an Islamic state run according to Islamic ``sharia`` law. Muslims need a secular and democratic state that respects religious freedom, human dignity, and is founded on the principle that power belongs to the people. This means confronting and rejecting the claim by orthodox Islamic scholars that in an Islamic state sovereignity does not belong to the people but, instead, to the vice-regents of Allah (Khilafat-al-Arz) or Islamic jurists (Vilayat-e-Faqih).``

I feel that the concept of Ummah at personal level is O.K but when the same becomes a national sentiment, we have a problem. Many Pakistanis may feel they have religious affinity to Saudi Arabia but culturally, all are from the Subcontinent which has its own unique culture, very distinct from the Arabic culture. If my Pakistani friends realise this and try to preserve this unique culture (which does not in anyway force them to give up their religion), they would be more at peace with themselves and not have to constantly strive for a seperate (from Indian) identity.

He goes on to say:

``Our collective survival lies in recognizing that religion is not the solution; neither is nationalism. Both are divisive, embedding within us false notions of superiority and arrogant pride that are difficult to erase. We have but one choice: the path of secular humanism, based upon the principles of logic and reason. This alone offers the hope of providing everybody on this globe with the right to life,liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.``

Religion is never a soloution to problems confronting a nation. At best, it can guide an individual and as Swami Yogananda says, is like a roadmap to God. To hope that Qoran or any religious texts have all the answers to human sufferings is unreasonable.

Nation state has been a western concept. This concept has only led to confrontation and war. Countries have jealously guarded their boundaries and wealth and not agreed to share the bounties with other nations. One reason why muslim nations and most of developing world are unhappy with the west is because these nations never benefitted from the rapid scientific advances made in the west. Yes, these advances have percolated thr` ever so slowly but benefit in terms of improving the standard of living of common man has been minimal. West has clearly advanced at the cost of East. Copyright laws, strict trade regimes are another way of economic imperialism. Can there be any copyright on Yogas or meditation which originated in the East or for that matter a number of other scientific inventions (Paper, printing press originated in China).

India and Pakistan should ease visa restrictions, start freer trade and move fast on people to people interactions. Let Kashmir problem not be a hinderance to all this.

Sridhar

There are some controversial things that Dr Hoodbhoy says in this article and i will comment on them later.

prof hobbs vs. prof hoodbhoy - god and harry potter vs. madlyn and chomsky

.......... secular humanism - humbug ! prof hobbyty, secure in the belief in hobgoblins and urstrulyism, has figured out prof hoodbhoy for what he really is - a dharia and enemy of god whose secular ideas threaten the modesty of misguided women on the campus of islamabad university and the careers of the jihadi talibs at the other university funded by bedouin wahabis .......

...... dharia! yes siree, that`s what he is - ask the folks at the institute of policy studies, the premier think tank in islamabad, founded and funded by the wizard of mansoora and supported by the islamic scholars in alexandria and indianapolis ....... ahtheist ! .... just because witch madlyn o`hair was stricken by a divine thunderbolt, does not mean we are rid of this scourge who would deny god his kingdom and little children their ameen candy ....... worst of all, he dances with horrible hindoos and self-hating american jews from boston .... not to digress - but how come you never hear anything about kooky prof naom chomsky in america - not even on homo-loving, pot-smoking, bleeding heart npr ....why do muslims, even the secular kind, pick looney spokesmen like chomsky who are one sandwich short of a picnic and should have their tenures and driver`s licences revoked .......

........ getting back to the battle between prof hobbs and prof hood - secular humanists are evil people who would have us believe that the physical laws of the universe are not superseded by non-material or supernatural entities such as angels, jinns and harry potter ......they don`t believe in shab-i-mairaj and interest free banking, miracles of maswak and watwani, ESP, telekinesis and ninety year old women bearing children ......

.... any good follower of urstrulyism can tell you that secular humanism is a conspiracy hatched by the free-masons, physicists, zionists and the boy-scouts to destroy the ummah by baring their souls and knees to reason and fresh air .....