Muslims and The West After 11th September

Dr. Poonawala,

``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.``

Why not have it all? Take pride in ALL civilizations, current and past - Asian, African, European, American. Go back a few million years back to the Rift Valley, East Africa, and take pride in that ape that decided to come down from the trees and start walking on two feet and use his free hands and apposable thumbs to build tools. Take pride in that little chap that crawled out of the sea a billion or so years ago and decided to develop legs and walk around on dry land. And why stop there either. Go back a billion or so more years back and take pride in the microscopic folks that decided to come together and form a multi-cellular community. You will have a lot more fun with your life that way. Sounds crazy? It is much better than clinging to that tiny point in the great temporal and geographical coordinates in which you happen to live your life, and which seems to take up so much attention of some people on chowk.

shankar #399: ``Ahemmm...I just want to humbly comment..at this.uh..juncture..that ..its cuz you havent seen me in a thong..``

I have always wondered what the various interactors on Chowk look like. I believe Chowk does allow scans of photographs within articles. Maybe, you should try that.

Seeing a Pakistani girl in shorts is no doubt a rare achievement, but seeing an Indian guy in a thong would be right up there with spotting the Loch Ness Monster.

Professor saab, I respect your views and do not disagree. Does any army officer agree with you.

Dear hoodbhoy

``First, Islam - like Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, or any other religion - is not about peace.

Nor is it about war.

Every religion is about absolute belief in its own superiority and the divine right to impose itself upon others.``(hoodbhoy)

You said it hoodbhoy, thanks for bursting the BUBBLE.

regards

The good professor argues for a world that follows ``the path of secular humanism, based upon the principles of logic and reason``. This, he claims, is our only ``hope of providing everybody on this globe with the right to life,liberty, and the pursuit of happiness``.

*Sigh *.

The last thing the World, the Muslim world in particular, Pakistan specifically, needs is another silver bullet ``ism``. The problems with, say, Pakistan is not ideological, but rather the inability or unwillingness of Pakistanis to get off their collective arse and DO something about their miserable state of affairs. A thriving economy, a working legal system, a functional health care system, etc. are independent of the state ideology.

I would also like to point out that a secular government could be a dysfunctional government. A secular society can be a fractured one. Furthermore, logic and reason alone cannot be applied without being tampered by human vice and failings. Humans are greedy, and ambitious. When we apply logic and reason to rather complex and nuanced issues, we must necessarily expect this logic to be at best ``dirty``, and self-centered.

This is not to lessen the worth of logic and reason - on the contrary. These are powerful intellectual tools. However, often what is ``logical`` and ``reasonable`` to us humans is in fact that which is pragmatic to the ruling elite and the upper echelons of society. Logic and reason alone as guides are insufficient. You need principles, and even if we claim to act in accordance to high principles, there still can be much conflict.

Consider extreamist violence. If indeed the words of an unquestionable God can be manipulated to justify violent acts when it suits our interests, then no doubt we can find ways to make extreme violence seem the only logical and reasonable course of action. Especially when our very principles and way of life are under threat. Ideology cannot help us here, as this is human nature. This is the devil in us that cannot be exorcised.

Consider Mr. Hoodbhoy`s claim that “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”. Although tempting indeed, I will ignore the implication that Islamists espouse ideals that are an absolute negation of the above ideals, a rather arrogant and deceptive assumption. I will ask a simple question instead: what if the empowered people don’t want a secular state? Then what? And to be fair, what if the people don’t want an Islamic state, as the Islamists demand? Are we to boycott the society? Are we only willing to help develop Pakistan if and only if it progresses according to our grand vision? Development should not be tied to any ideological baggage.



No, religion is not the solution. Neither is communism, socialism, nationalism, or any other ``ism``, including ``secular humanism``. Progress is only hampered by the fact that the ideologues are unable to put their differences aside and work for the common good.

For God’s sake, Pakistan still does not have garbage removal services in its major urban centers, and here we are talking about how to civilize ourselves? How about starting off by not wallowing in our own filth….secularist and Islamist alike.

-digit

re: hobbyt

``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.``

Innocent civillians? Why were those idiots in Afghanistan in the first place? Were`nt your types predicting that this would be another Vietnam and encouraging those poor illiterate people to go wage a Holy War. All of these Fazloo types are responsible for their deaths and should be brought to justice. From b_astards like Qazi Hussain to Sami ul Haq - all of them should be tried and punished for mass murder.

re: hamzad

Still delusional eh? And the Germans teaching Islam in their schools proves that they have suddenly discovered the superiority of Islam uber alles. Any plans to start a program on harnessing jin-power that you might be aware of?

``Dr. Hoodbhoy has completely glossed over the fact that the Crusades may have had something to do with the destruction of the nascent Islamic civilization from which recovery has proved to be very difficult.``

That would not be a correct assessment. The Crusades have nothing to do with Ghazali`s warped mentality and the destruction of real estate (libraries, centers of learning, etc.) was carried out by the Mongol/Turkic invaders in the 13th century.

#: 6

sac

The true sign of outstanding intellect is the ability to frame seemingly complex and unrelated topics in layman terms. Prof. Sahib`s article is a prime example. The best ones also use humor and analogies to make their points clearer. Others on chowk who come close to meeting that high standard are SameerJB and Fuzair. 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.

later

-sac

So Sac you are an INTELLECT understanding somthing by Hoodbhoy ,who is also an intellect ACCORDING to you !

It takes one to know one.

To not agree with `less read` ppl like you & your mentor .isnt saying we dont understand you nor that we understand Hoobtyl or Hamzad or R0mair,orUrstruly,orTAhmed,orFZK ,better .We understand All of them,it isnt the harder part .Dammit its in simble english god dammit.But your & your mentors reading is too damn SIMBLE to be accurate ,true & logical.

dr. hoodbhoy

.... i know you don`t reply to questions, but then again, i never ask questions either .... but maybe just this once you will break your rule and answer the question i had asked earlier ......here it is again :

...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 .......

..... and being a self-hating muslim myself i don`t mean any disrespect to crazy chomsky, but you must admit that in america he is considered to be on the other side of the lunatic fringe - out there with the black panthers, symbionese soldiers, farakhan freaks and pimple-faced johnny walker ....... i know he recieved a great reception in pakistan, and you probably missed quite a few lectures to be with the great man, but don`t you realize that he is quite irrelevant - a raving looney that nobody, not even npr, pays any attention to ..... i am sure you could have done better ........

hamzad afaqui

... this is terrible ... you have finally forced me into indulging in the irritating practice of cut n`paste ...... since you seem to be so obsessed with the march of islam in the west and are convinced that in a few years, inshallah, the queen will be wearing the burqa and charles will give up taking his weekly bath, here is a piece of news that might make you rethink your plans about sending your kids to a madrassa in manchester :

`` UK Home Secretary David Blunkett has urged people from ethnic minorities to develop what he calls a ``sense of belonging`` in Britain.

In a newspaper interview, he says racism is often deep-seated and must be confronted, but immigrants who settle here must do their bit to ensure that future generations grow up ``feeling British``.

...... i hate to burst yur bubble but i don`t think civilization is ready to regress to the seventh century .......

Professor Hoodbhoy’s essay is a tour de force, and will no doubt inspire much debate and dialogue throughout the world. I found much to agree with in Hoodbhoy’s essay, but even more to disagree with. He argues that the US, in its zeal to bring justice to the terrorists, is not taking the time to understand the root causes of terrorism. Given its own history of supporting corrupt and tyrannical regimes through out Latin America, the Middle East, and the Asia-Pacific region, US actions belie its claim to being a “champion of democracy and human rights”. In fact, they lend credence to the words of MIT Professor Noam Chomsky, that the US is the world`s Number 1 ``rogue state.``

Hoodbhoy further argues that the Taliban`s interpretation of Islam was bigoted, extremist, and wrong, and caused much harm to Islam. Their extremist views have inspired much of the sectarian killing that has been going on in Pakistan for the past few years. Osama bin Laden`s views and policies--while much admired in the Muslim world because of their political underpinnings-- have caused more suffering and aggravation to the Muslims than to the non-Muslims. His “fatwa” to kill Americans –whether civilian or military—outraged Muslims and non-Muslims alike. The terrorist actions of September 11--which Osama praised but for whom he did not acceptability—have to be condemned in the strongest possible terms, and their perpetrators brought to justice. I agree completely with these sentiments.

However, I don`t agree with Hoodbhoy’s implicit thesis--that Muslims should not aspire to create an Islamic state-- and that they should instead aspire to become ``secular humanists.`` Hoodbhoy’s assertion that today`s conditions are very different from those of Arabia 1,400 yeas ago is irrelevant. Until just a century or two ago, Muslims had a caliphate (rule by a Caliph or Khalifa, successor to the Holy Prophet Muhammad) along the lines of an Islamic state. In this caliphate, religious and political authority was interwoven. The caliphate period demonstrated that an Islamic state could exist with large minority populations. As Professor Hoodbhoy himself argues, science and the arts flourished in the Islamic states that ruled variously from Baghdad (Iraq) and Cordoba (Spain).

Imam Ghazzali created a grand synthesis in the writings of rational philosophers and the writings of Sufis. By so doing, he created flexibility and not rigidity in Islamic thinking. If he emphasized the role of ``revelation over reason,`` it was because he accepted the divine, infallible character of the former and the human, infallible character of the latter. I have learnt much from Ghazzali’s writings, especially from his short book on the Inner Dimensions of Islamic Worship. This book brilliantly illuminates the basic principles of Islam by integrating the Quran and ahadith (sayings of the Prophet).

Hoodbhoy cites the examples of those who rejected ahadith to liberate themselves and pursue scientific advancement. Rejecting ahadith that contradict the Quran is one thing, but rejecting ahadith altogether is hardly a tenable course of action for a Muslim. Basic religious precepts, such as how and when to say your prayers, are defined through the ahadith. Only through a study of the life of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (May God’s Mercy and Salutations be upon him) can we understand the full purpose and intent of the divine revelations that constitute the Quran. The ahadith are the only genuine way to understanding the Prophet’s life.

Professor Hoodbhoy regrets that the names of Muslim scientists do not fill up the bibliographies in today’s scientific journals. This shortcoming can hardly be attributed to the religion by which they live. It is the fault of the educational institutions from which they graduated; the fault of the system within which they work, which does not sufficiently incent them to publish; and ultimately it is their own fault.

People like Mustapha Kamal or Mohammad Ali Jinnah can hardly be considered icons of Muslim leadership in the 20th century. The former caused mass murder on a large scale in Turkey, and in his zeal to impose a secular view on that country, even outlawed any outward acceptance of Islamic symbols, such as the Arabic language or the wearing of head scarves by women. The latter created a homeland for the Muslims of South Asia without thinking through what implications it would have for the Muslims who would be left behind in India. Undivided India could easily have been a secular state for the Muslims of South Asia, who constituted a third of the population in 1947.

Hoodbhoy commends secular humanism to Muslims as an alternative to creating an Islamic state. Unfortunately, secular humanism has much too often been the ``mantra`` of apostates like Ibn Waraq (the Iraqi native who has written a book called Why I am not a Muslim) and Salman Rushdie. Moreover, I am not convinced that it will solve any of the problems that bedevil the Muslim world today. Secular humanism underlies much Western political thinking, which is as hypocritical and self-serving as any other system. This country, being its ultimate manifestation, has been responsible for the deaths of more than a million Iraqis since the Gulf War, more than half of them children. In large measure, the sufferings and deprivations of the Afghan people during the past 23 years have to be laid at the door of policy makers in the nation’s capital. Much evil has been committed in the name of religion by people such as the Taliban and Osama bin Laden, but even more evil been committed in the name of secular humanism.

Dr Hoodbhoy thanks for a great article.

I have followed your writings for a long time and i was really gratified to see you on american tv during a news programme recently, you are much younger then i thought.Keep up the good work! I hope u will interact.

If I may add my two dimes worth:

I think we need to get away from the mindset of viewing the western block in general and the U.S in particular as a monolith and our enemy they are neither.We live in a small world akin to a neighbourhood some neghbours have more then others.

like or not U.S is the center of the universe for all humanity now and for a long time to come.

The principals of democracy and individual freedom that have taken root on this soil are universal and all mankind can partake of it, and will.Inshallah.

The myth that the western block was decadent and was going to fall to pieces when challenged has been shattered.

The good news is that the so called west is no longer populated by any particular ethnic group or religious group, it is a club with membership open to all who believe in these principals.

A notice to those who oppose it,do so at your own peril.

samina,

{{American`` or a ``democracy lover`` have the courage to acknowledge that shortsighted US policy has had some very self serving and not altruistic motivations? Yes or no?}}

ABSOLUTELY YES!!

And why not?! We elect the President to protect & further our interests-not anybody elses. Thats what theyre paid to do. Yeah yeah every President will put an ``altruistic`` & ``holier-than-the rest of-the-world`` spin to make us ``feel good about ourselves``. Anybody who hasnt figured that out has to grow up a bit (er..not you, ofcourse).

In 71, I used to be very angry at Nixon (& the US). As far as I was concerned, Nixon`s ``tilt towards Pakistan`` was a complete hypocracy. Here was the ``champion of democracy & freedom``, siding with a murdering, genocidal, military dictator Yayha--who was responsible for butchering a people & party (Bengalis/Awami League) after they won an election & demanded the right to rule Pakistan.

Then I come to Chowk & find out Pakistanis felt equally betrayed at ``US ingratitude`` by not coming to their assisstance during the war!!

Hey, ``Down with America`` is fashionable for every third world country. But those same besharams dont have ANY problems sticking their palms out and asking for MONEY (or F-16s)! Once they get the AID , its ``bash America`` again. Thats the problem with the world. They think AID is a bloody entitlement. I wish that with every dollar or F-16, these people are made to chant ``there is no such thing as a free lunch``.

Bottom line--I dont care what country you talk about--protecting & furthering INTERESTS is #1

priority. Ideology is only for domestic propaganda. Maybe I`m getting cynical with age:)

We dont elect our leaders to solve the problems of the world. If people dont like the US; the US doesnt kill them or put a gun to their head & force them to like Uncle Sam. Go ahead & protest PEACEFULLY. Have a non-violent hartal, burn the US flag & effigies of the Prsident- all you want. Heck, even American citizens do that! But ``DONT F WITH US``!

One final thing...bleeding heart liberals should realise there is such a thing as ``collective responsibility``. If a country has corrupt & brutal dictators--all the people suffer. Thats the unwritten law that has been prevalent since the birth of human history. The US DIDNT write that law!

Boohoo; the children in Iraq are dying & the children in Afghanistan are dying. Guess what--its Saddam`s FAULT & the fault of the mentality of the Afghan leadership (just see their bs bickering even when the Taleban are finished!!). BUT, of course, America is ultimately responsible!!

I guess when we are in our 20s we all start by being bleeding heart liberals. Jeeze--I remember when I was that age. We wrote in blood that we will NEVER be like that OLDER generation--with all their pious, hypocritical double standards. Guess what! the older we grow, much to our shigrin, we are becoming just like our parents--damn!

Life aint fair; never was; never will be, no matter how much these liberals wring their hands--

ITS ALL EVE`S FAULT! Forced poor Adam to eat that frikking apple--otherwise no boom boom. It was all downhill from then on!:)

Peace--er time for breakast:)

hamidm---60?

`` UK Home Secretary David Blunkett has urged people from ethnic minorities to develop what he calls a ``sense of belonging`` in Britain.

[[In a newspaper interview, he says racism is often deep-seated and must be confronted, but immigrants who settle here must do their bit to ensure that future generations grow up ``feeling British``.

...... i hate to burst yur bubble but i don`t think civilization is ready to regress to the seventh century .......]]

How does one commence this process of ``feeling British``..quite stupid,isn`t it?

But for argument sake let us analyse this stupidity as well...

So the Normans and the Saxons should be the first to be deported unless they start kissing the stonehenge & eating the mistletoe.Ask for public forgiveness for unseating Bodecia & piercing Herods` eye with an arrow at hastings.What about Scots & Irish & Welsh,when should they start a campaign to have their national language.How to outlaw english-curry as a national dish?

The possibilities are astounding!

An easier route would be to have Charles come out of the closet & announce he being muslim AND assume his role as monarch.The rest will be history.

I do not live in a bubble--so there is nothing to burst.

afaraqui

``Until just a century or two ago, Muslims had a caliphate (rule by a Caliph or Khalifa, successor to the Holy Prophet Muhammad) along the lines of an Islamic state``

...... are you suggesting that we bring back the ottomans - let me remind you that it was only in 1876 that Abdul Hamid declared himself the Caliph of Islam and introduced the craziness of pan-islamicism .... before that the ottomans were too busy murdering their siblings and grand viziers ( abdul hamid was more subtle - sending an executioner with silken cords to visit Midhat,the grand vizier, and making sure his brother murad died in prison) ........ before Hamid the Mad ( not related to HamidM) the Ottoman sultans had never made a formal claim to the title of caliph ..............

.......now before we go wishing for the caliphate, please count the number of ottoman sultans who were not killed by relatives tired of waiting for the throne ........ in this regard they proudly maintained the ratio established by the original pious four .....do you seriously want to go back to that ?

afaraqui

``Until just a century or two ago, Muslims had a caliphate (rule by a Caliph or Khalifa, successor to the Holy Prophet Muhammad) along the lines of an Islamic state``

...... are you suggesting that we bring back the ottomans - let me remind you that it was only in 1876 that Abdul Hamid declared himself the Caliph of Islam and introduced the craziness of pan-islamicism .... before that the ottomans were too busy murdering their siblings and grand viziers ( abdul hamid was more subtle - sending an executioner with silken cords to visit Midhat,the grand vizier, and making sure his brother murad died in prison) ........ before Hamid the Mad ( not related to HamidM) the Ottoman sultans had never made a formal claim to the title of caliph ..............

.......now before we go wishing for the caliphate, please count the number of ottoman sultans who were not killed by relatives tired of waiting for the throne ........ in this regard they proudly maintained the ratio established by the original pious four .....do you seriously want to go back to that ?