Pakistan: The War of Drones Is that also 'only a myth'?

By saying only, you are somehow diminishing the importance of myth. I never intended to do that. To answer you, yes it is a myth. Nobody has died and returned back to give us definitively as to what happens after death and what is its link with our life on earth.

Pakistan: The War of Drones #353 Posted by khurram

What is the foundation myth of modern western civilization?

Western civilization takes inspiration from 2 sources.

The Judeo-Christian tradition and the Greco-Roman civilization. Without delving deep into it let me answer the two fundamental questions for you. What am I doing here? This is answered straight from the Platonic playbook. Man’s basic purpose in this world is to achieve his arate. Arate a Greek word roughly translated as excellence. Every human being ever created is unique in his own way and endowed with skills that are individual to him. His purpose in life is to develop and make use of these skills to the fullest and in doing so he has achieved the purpose of his existence. The second question is answered mostly through the Judeo Christian tradition, which simply put that you will achieve salvation by doing the right thing. The concept of heaven is not of a place as depicted in Dante’s Divine Comedy, it is more like an ethereal existence in God’s grace. On the Platonic side it is answered as the realm of the soul, where the soul would return to a state of the forms. Where there is perfect knowledge, perfection of every thing that we see only a shadow of in our worldly existence.

Pakistan: The War of Drones 343 Posted by Urstruly

I agree with you that at its core it is a political issue and needs to be addressed as such. But the trouble is that this political issue can be very easily converted by our mullah brigade into a religious issue and come up with remedies which only suit their nefarious aims. You seem to feel that this is the fault of external forces whereas I feel that we do a pretty good job of it ourselves. Lets again explore a bit of history. The Mahdi in Sudan who opposed the British during the 19th century successfully converted such “temporal objectives like sovereignty, freedom, and political clout’ into a religious war. Same thing happens everywhere and with greater frequency, Shah of Iran to Khomeni, Soviet Union to Taliban. Why is it that only Muslim societies tend to turn religious when faced with “political issues”, that perhaps is the more pertinent question. How come the Hindus against the British or South Africa against its apartheid regime didn’t convert their movements into religious movements? These are the questions that beg an answer.

The point is that in Muslim societies the opposition to status quo finds a reservoir of power by harnessing jihad for achieving its ends. We all know that who ever used this power used it to establish their own tyranny, and till this fact is well publicized to the ummah, we will continue to make the same mistake over and over again. What has to be emphasized is the need to be very careful about the motives of these false prophets.

Pakistan: The War of Drones #322 Posted by Urstruly


“the argument that "Islam is encouraging Muslims to commit acts of terrorism" is wrong at its core”

Every society at its core has some thing that I refer to as a foundation myth. This is a set of ideas or a vision for the group which answers two fundamental questions which are primary to our very existence. Firstly it tries to answer the question, why am I here? And secondly what is going to become of me once I am no longer here. In other words what is the purpose or what am I supposed to do while I am alive and the second that what will become of me once I die.


Islam answers these questions very succinctly. The purpose of a Muslim’s existence in this world is submission to the will of God as laid down in the Quran and Sunnah and to help establish God’s rule on earth. Once he spends his life in this manner he will obtain eternity in Paradise with all the goodies that have been clearly mentioned in God’s Book. Bukhshish, akhirat, eternal salvation or eternal hellfire are powerful visions which become of fundamental importance to anybody who is born in the faith. This is why even a very well educated Muslim who might have spent his entire life in the West will turn on a dime when he becomes certain that his eternity is insecure (who will blame him). Others who are not doing very well in their worldly existence consider hastening to paradise and eternal pleasure an easy bargain.

Here your quote of Goebles becomes very apropos. Unless this foundation myth which is nothing more then a myth (as nobody has attested the existence of an actual heaven and hell), it will remain extremely effective. You are right, the West and the enlightened moderation gang are clueless – they have been unable to identify where the fundamental fault line lies. Only a belief in a Good, Benevolent God, an assurance of easy salvation, an acceptance in embracing the goodness in every human being no matter what his persuasion could all go a long way to break the grip of this apoplectic vision. Only then can we dig ourselves out of the hole we have created.

I will address the historical narrative part of your post as soon as I have more time.

Pakistan: The War of Drones The account of the terrorist training video takes its inspiration directly from past Islamic History. It was Hassan Al Sabbah, Lord of Alamut who took over this castle in Persia around 1050 AD. The terms assassin and hashish are subscribed to this wielder of terror. They used to assassinate anybody they deemed as their enemy, and used the dagger as their weapon of choice. The followers known as fidai were so well indoctrinated that they would not only commit the assassination, but in case caught would claim that the vizier or another sultan loyalist had actually hired them for the assassination. Thus it was a double whammy the nobleman was dead and the revenge was sought on further loyal followers.

Amazing stories of the fidai are well known. To demonstrate his power one time Hassan Sabbah had a fidai slit his throat while another threw himself off the parapet down the cliff. How they were indoctrinated the following excerpt clearly demonstrates:


"The Old Man kept at his court such boys of twelve years old as seemed to him destined to become courageous men. When the Old Man sent them into the garden in groups of four, ten or twenty, he gave them hashish to drink. They slept for three days, then they were carried sleeping into the garden where he had them awakened.
When these young men woke, and found themselves in the garden with all these marvelous things, they truly believed themselves to be in paradise. And these damsels were always with them in songs and great entertainments; they received everything they asked for, so that they would never have left that garden of their own will.
And when the Old Man wished to kill someone, he would take him and say: ‘Go and do this thing. I do this because I want to make you return to paradise’. And the assassins go and perform the deed willingly."
— The Adventures of Marco Polo

Reinterpretation of Islam in Turkey 260 Posted by zeemax on March 4, 2008 8:10:58 am

I don’t know why you say it’s false. God does not descend from heaven to tell us how exactly to use his book. From Khulfa e Rashidun on down this will has been interpreted by the Caliphs and subsequent kings who used their chamcha ulemas to give the King’s will the guise of Quranic sanction. Yes, there have been several examples of ulema who protested and in this process were lashed, imprisoned or put to death. I would like you to site a single example from antiquity, where such a rebellion that may have lead to a revolt, the ummah claiming true Sharia and establishing an Islamic state. Nineteenth and Twentieth century examples are nothing more then stylistic oppositions that precipitated in personality cults. I am talking about the Mehdi in Sudan and Ayatullah Khomeini.

Non-submission to anything in worldly terms is not liberty?

I think a bit of education is in order. Starting from the first fitna which occurred in Uthman’s time opposing parties have always held up the Quran and claimed whatever their viewpoint as according to the Book and claimed themselves to be the true defenders of the faith, while deriding the opposing side as Godless, against the Book and the faith, and against righteousness. Every one is happy to have others submit to their version of the Quran, in other words their will, what could be more hypocritical then that. So you always wave the Book to achieve submission to whatever idea you have.

Reinterpretation of Islam in Turkey #253 Posted by tahmed32 on March 4, 2008 7:59:38 am

Submission to the will of God, as expressed by you is one thing, but it is another when it becomes as interpreted and enforced by the Khalifa ul Vaqt. This is the Taliban, Mullah Omar and the Saudi King model. Through out history and even with the current crop of Islamic rulers they all take their legitimacy from this hierarchy. Their enforcement is only tempered by their personal abilities and both internal and external pressures. So you have the right to express your freedoms till prayer time when mutawa forces you to close shop and head for the mosque.

Reinterpretation of Islam in Turkey #239 Posted by zeemax on March 4, 2008

Well let me just give you an opening remark. Islam means submission. Submission to the will of God. The will of God as expressed in his Book the Quran. As interpreted and enforced by the Khalifa ul Vaqt. Isn’t submission diametrically opposed to liberty?

Rather then quipping about my ignorance why don’t you provide a scholarly refutation.

PS: this is a repeat of my 249 post where I forgot to direct it to the appropriate party.

Reinterpretation of Islam in Turkey Well let me just give you an opening remark. Islam means submission. Submission to the will of God. The will of God as expressed in his Book the Quran. As interpreted and enforced by the Khalifa ul Vaqt. Isn’t submission diametrically opposed to liberty?

Rather then quipping about my ignorance why don’t you provide a scholarly refutation.

Reinterpretation of Islam in Turkey Zeemax:

No my friend, this is one of the usual suspects. I guess, I should blame it on Chowk’s incompetence, for whatever reason whenever I go to sign in, my ID of Tehsinabbasi is coming as unrecognizable. I emailed their help desk but got tired of waiting for their response which hasn’t come as yet. So I figured I’d set up a new ID. I could’ve pretended to be Bluemax or Zaro, but you know me I hate pretenses.

Reinterpretation of Islam in Turkey TAhmad:

I am glad that you have defined Islam for yourself, but that is an individual interpretation not shared by the billion plus throng. So unless you plan an evangelizing mission (a reformation movement) it will be restricted to yourself. The question becomes, could any such mission how ever carefully crafted succeed?

I have observed one such heroic attempt by Mr. Ghamdi, who has put an “enlightened moderation” hue to this dilemma. But as he continues to dig deeper to find answers to never ending questions, he ends up looking like the rest of the so called ulemas who selectively quote the Quran for their particular point of view.

The real trouble why I say that the reformation window is closed is the fact that humanity has moved on. The values that inspire the world today are those of liberty and justice. Every where you go this is the battle cry of the “unwashed masses”. In Islam there is no concept of liberty, there is a concept of freedom which is also defined in a very limited sense, meaning an absence of slavery. As far as justice goes, the only couple of times that the Quran mentions justice it is in terms of the Judgement Day when God will administer justice. Selectively broadening these areas interferes both with truth and justice.

Reinterpretation of Islam in Turkey Back to the Article:

Reformation as other events in history have to occur within a time frame. In Christianity it took place when religion itself was central in peoples’ lives. It was before the industrial revolution when the printing press was just coming on and people were insisting on knowing what the priest was saying in Latin. Things have changed entirely, Europe was lucky to have its religion evolve and reform but even then the Western half has abandoned religion, while the Eastern half gave it up as state policy. China and the Far East have followed a similar path.

Just because Muslims continue to hold on to their orthodoxy does not mean that once their system is questioned it can be coherently brought to modernity as it happened with Christianity. The time for such an evolutionary approach is long gone. The world has moved on and too much information will prevent any such measures to take root.

The only thing that can happen is to allow Islam to take the route of the typewriter. Those who wish to maintain their machines, both mechanical and electrical can do so but with dismal results and diminishing utility, and hopefully they will end up dying away. The rest of us should just ignore it and move on.