The Fundo Chic?
Nadeem F Paracha January 25, 2006
#61 Posted by baaghiraja on January 30, 2006 8:35:10 pm
Re: # 59
Agreed Yasser. My point was that a real debate is vital in a country like Pakistan. Purely to clear exactly what secularism is. In other words it requires an explaination other than what has been given by the mullahs.
And of course ARY sucks, man. Thus the irony of it being the only channel on which a one-off debate took place that was the closest to explaining secularism beyond the mullah version.
Rgds,
NfP
Agreed Yasser. My point was that a real debate is vital in a country like Pakistan. Purely to clear exactly what secularism is. In other words it requires an explaination other than what has been given by the mullahs.
And of course ARY sucks, man. Thus the irony of it being the only channel on which a one-off debate took place that was the closest to explaining secularism beyond the mullah version.
Rgds,
NfP
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#60 Posted by aquaris on January 30, 2006 6:45:33 am
I think Farhat Hashmi is a commercial Phenomenon .... cashing In on a perticular Mind set prevailing ..... and a Fad.
#59 Posted by MantoLives on January 30, 2006 5:40:57 am
The debate... nfp... has to avoid any pitfalls of Islam vs Secular ... so as to avoid the two being pitted against each other.
ARY sucks... but there will come a number of channels more kosher to our views...
ARY sucks... but there will come a number of channels more kosher to our views...
#58 Posted by aquaris on January 30, 2006 5:18:35 am
I think Farhat Hashmi is a commercial Phenomenon .... cashing In on a perticular Mind set prevailing ..... and a Fad.
#57 Posted by Love2love on January 30, 2006 1:37:19 am
Re: # 56
Even though a hint of sarcasm is obvious when you call publishers of Daily Times and Friday Times progressive, but really NFP, that ARY debate you are hailing was more of what you called was going around in chakars. Fine Najam Sethi and co. of DT and TFT may not come up to your standards of progressivism but the truth is if they too start airing their secular or agnostic views like you do, we`ll all be left isolated. You may enjoy that, but maybe other progressives would like to take a more, if I may, a practical way? Of course, none of this takes away the fact that I pretty much agree with you as far as your piece is concerned.
Even though a hint of sarcasm is obvious when you call publishers of Daily Times and Friday Times progressive, but really NFP, that ARY debate you are hailing was more of what you called was going around in chakars. Fine Najam Sethi and co. of DT and TFT may not come up to your standards of progressivism but the truth is if they too start airing their secular or agnostic views like you do, we`ll all be left isolated. You may enjoy that, but maybe other progressives would like to take a more, if I may, a practical way? Of course, none of this takes away the fact that I pretty much agree with you as far as your piece is concerned.
#56 Posted by baaghiraja on January 30, 2006 12:28:33 am
#55 ``The secular-vs-Islamic debate is old, endless and useless. ``
In total agreement with you, Yasser. But the problem in Pakistan is that this debate is still a very uncommon happening. Even on so-called ``progressive`` forums (and which, by the way, includes publishers of Daily Times and Friday Times). In Pakistan we are not exactly debating secularism Vs. Islam, but this Islam Vs. that. Not even the most progressive intellectual in this country is ready to go public about his or her pro-secular views. They are all stuck in a war of interpertations (of Koran). That`s why we keep going in circuls.
Ironically the only worthwhile debate in this context took place on ARY. I say ironic because ARY usually takes a right-wing view and the debate (which included Dr. Javed Iqbal, Dr. Akber Ali and Dr. Israr Ahmed), was hosted by Dr. Shahid Masood. But then, like they say, only Nixon can go to China.
Rgds,
NfP
In total agreement with you, Yasser. But the problem in Pakistan is that this debate is still a very uncommon happening. Even on so-called ``progressive`` forums (and which, by the way, includes publishers of Daily Times and Friday Times). In Pakistan we are not exactly debating secularism Vs. Islam, but this Islam Vs. that. Not even the most progressive intellectual in this country is ready to go public about his or her pro-secular views. They are all stuck in a war of interpertations (of Koran). That`s why we keep going in circuls.
Ironically the only worthwhile debate in this context took place on ARY. I say ironic because ARY usually takes a right-wing view and the debate (which included Dr. Javed Iqbal, Dr. Akber Ali and Dr. Israr Ahmed), was hosted by Dr. Shahid Masood. But then, like they say, only Nixon can go to China.
Rgds,
NfP
#55 Posted by MantoLives on January 29, 2006 10:06:13 pm
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2006 01 29 story_29-1-2006_pg7_18
January 29 — A red letter day for Modern Pakistan
By Yasser Latif Hamdani
Forgive me for being an eternal optimist, but I look forward to this Sunday as a Pakistani. Not only will Lahore once again organise a city marathon, which will hopefully show case Pakistan as a leading tourist and sporting destination, but Bryan Adams, the world-renowned rock star, will hold a mega concert in Karachi with our very own Shehzad Roy. For many countries in the world, these would not constitute major national events, but the story is different in Pakistan, or atleast the Pakistan that I grew up in after General Zia ul Haq’s military rule.
To be fair, they say that Pakistan was a different country before Zia, though very much Islamic, but being Islamic meant something entirely different from what it means now. Before General Zia-ul-Haq took over, to be Islamic meant to be just and fair, to believe in an egalitarian society, to live and let live and all that could be thought positive. It did not mean rituals, hijabs, beards, oppressive hudood laws and victimization of women and minorities. They say it was possible for good Muslims then to have a drink and show their moves on the dance floor without calling into question their loyalty to Islam.
All this changed with the coming of General Zia and the Afghan war. Islam since then has meant shia-sunni violence and jehad. The globalisation that took place in 1990s only fanned these feelings as now apart from the growing sectarian violence, Muslims also imagined themselves to be a global minority. With borders increasingly becoming meaningless, the security of a Muslim majority country was not enough. Thus loyalty to Pakistan was being eroded and replaced by a loyalty to a global jehad movement. And this seemed to affect all sections society and in fact the upper crust more than the rest. Back in high school in the mid 1990s, one of my classmates, a really rich spoilt brat, got a very expensive sports car as a present from his parents. He told me very seriously one day that he would modify it to go wage a jehad. I don’t know if it was a James Bond flick or real Islamist propaganda, but luckily he grew out of it and the car stayed as is.
Alongside the rise of this violent Islam, we have also seen increased conservatism in form of the Tablighi Jamaat- now officially an organisation with terror links on US-homeland security list. An aside: I shudder to think what would happen to our cricket team if the proposal to play India-Pakistan matches in the United States goes through. Interesting fellows these Tablighi jamaatwallahs are. One Ramzan afternoon, they came and bothered me about Islam. Their notions of Islam are very Post-Zia and certainly not what I believe Islam is. So naturally when I asked them what they had done as good Muslims for the material development of Pakistan and the Muslim world, they had no answers and these were LUMS students. One wonders why they feel so qualified to speak on Islam then?
For our ladies, of course, there was until recently Dr Farhat Hashmi and her Al Huda brigade. Many queens of the society pages suddenly went Hijabis come this millennium. It was almost as the saying goes ‘Nau sau chuhay khaa kay billi haj ko chali’ but jokes aside, the Al Huda fad, now receding mercifully after Farhat Hashmi’s allegedly forced departure to Canada, showed us how our understanding of Islam has completely gone haywire.
One must give credit where it’s due. Our Oligarch-in-chief President Musharraf, recently nominated the 17th worst dictator of 2005, has in some ways smashed Zia-ul-Haq’s legacy with his own social liberalism. The proliferation of private channels and state patronage of art and culture has made much of this irreversible. One remembers when Zafrullah Jamali tried to clamp down on fashion shows as “against Islam” our soldier statesman put him in his place. Last year’s marathon and now this year’s repeat- though one was apprehensive that this would be another one in Musharraf’s long list of one-time experiments such as the Daylight Saving Time- and also the return of international musicians of the stature of Bryan Adams to Pakistan is just one indication that maybe General Zia-ul-Haq’s 11 years are now finally behind us, even if our understanding of Islam has not reverted to pre-1977 or some would argue pre-1974 period.
This is not enough however. Musharraf must ensure that his is the last military intervention and from 2007 onwards Pakistan will become a constitutional democracy with stability and consistency and a smooth and regular transfer of power. He should ensure that the marginalised groups, the minorities and women are no longer marginalized but get a major chunk of the Pakistani political pie not just because it was one of the stated aims at the initiation of Pakistan and not just because the world now is increasingly intolerant of militarised theocracies and oligarchies, but because only a constitutional democratic path can ensure the continuity of a socially liberal welfare state which is truly, not ritually, Islamic and therefore just and egalitarian.
In the meantime, let us run the Lahore Marathon and listen to Bryan Adams for this is the red-letter day for a new, confident and modern Pakistan.
--
Choice of Pakistan’s people
Sir: Abdul Mannan’s letter (‘The leader and the led’, January 26) proclaiming an Islamic state on behalf of the ‘masses’ misses the point. I wish to point out the following:
1. The secular-vs-Islamic debate is old, endless and useless. The relevant discussion here is about a constitutional democracy and a military-sponsored theocracy. I am sure the people of Pakistan will choose constitutional democracy, which is Jinnah’s vision, over a military theocracy any day.
2. That said why did the Jamaat-e-Islami, Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind and Majlis-e-Ahrar bitterly oppose the creation of Pakistan — denouncing it as a Kemalist state when establishing an Islamic utopia was Pakistan movement’s battle cry. The ulema opposed the creation of Pakistan because they knew the Islam Jinnah spoke of was not the Islam they wanted to impose on the masses.
3. Jinnah did speak of Islam as a positive reinforcer, not least because it was important to his constituents. But what was the nature of the Islam he spoke of? He spoke of an Islam that “came into the world for democracy” (March 1945); whose “idealism has taught us democracy” (July 1947); an Islam “in which there is no ecclesiastical state” (December 1947); of Islamic principles of “Equality, fraternity and justice for all mankind”. He repeatedly spoke of equal rights for non-Muslims. He said very clearly on at least two dozen occasions that Pakistan “shall not be a theocracy”.
4. The masses were not stupid when they chose Jinnah instead of Maududi or Madni as their leader. They were not stupid when they voted en masse for Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. They were not stupid when they voted for Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif. Even in 2002 they voted overwhelmingly for parties opposed to theocracy. When the people speak of an Islamic state, they speak of a just and egalitarian state free of corruption that is committed to peace and rule of law. The “masses” are not interested in discriminating against non-Muslims or imposing their religious views on others, as is the wont of every religious party. Elections have repeatedly shown this.
5. The lives lost in 1947 were not sacrificed to an idea. They were lost because communal violence broke out on both sides. This stigmatised, rather than glorified the idea of Pakistan.
YASSER LATIF HAMDANI
Lahore
January 29 — A red letter day for Modern Pakistan
By Yasser Latif Hamdani
Forgive me for being an eternal optimist, but I look forward to this Sunday as a Pakistani. Not only will Lahore once again organise a city marathon, which will hopefully show case Pakistan as a leading tourist and sporting destination, but Bryan Adams, the world-renowned rock star, will hold a mega concert in Karachi with our very own Shehzad Roy. For many countries in the world, these would not constitute major national events, but the story is different in Pakistan, or atleast the Pakistan that I grew up in after General Zia ul Haq’s military rule.
To be fair, they say that Pakistan was a different country before Zia, though very much Islamic, but being Islamic meant something entirely different from what it means now. Before General Zia-ul-Haq took over, to be Islamic meant to be just and fair, to believe in an egalitarian society, to live and let live and all that could be thought positive. It did not mean rituals, hijabs, beards, oppressive hudood laws and victimization of women and minorities. They say it was possible for good Muslims then to have a drink and show their moves on the dance floor without calling into question their loyalty to Islam.
All this changed with the coming of General Zia and the Afghan war. Islam since then has meant shia-sunni violence and jehad. The globalisation that took place in 1990s only fanned these feelings as now apart from the growing sectarian violence, Muslims also imagined themselves to be a global minority. With borders increasingly becoming meaningless, the security of a Muslim majority country was not enough. Thus loyalty to Pakistan was being eroded and replaced by a loyalty to a global jehad movement. And this seemed to affect all sections society and in fact the upper crust more than the rest. Back in high school in the mid 1990s, one of my classmates, a really rich spoilt brat, got a very expensive sports car as a present from his parents. He told me very seriously one day that he would modify it to go wage a jehad. I don’t know if it was a James Bond flick or real Islamist propaganda, but luckily he grew out of it and the car stayed as is.
Alongside the rise of this violent Islam, we have also seen increased conservatism in form of the Tablighi Jamaat- now officially an organisation with terror links on US-homeland security list. An aside: I shudder to think what would happen to our cricket team if the proposal to play India-Pakistan matches in the United States goes through. Interesting fellows these Tablighi jamaatwallahs are. One Ramzan afternoon, they came and bothered me about Islam. Their notions of Islam are very Post-Zia and certainly not what I believe Islam is. So naturally when I asked them what they had done as good Muslims for the material development of Pakistan and the Muslim world, they had no answers and these were LUMS students. One wonders why they feel so qualified to speak on Islam then?
For our ladies, of course, there was until recently Dr Farhat Hashmi and her Al Huda brigade. Many queens of the society pages suddenly went Hijabis come this millennium. It was almost as the saying goes ‘Nau sau chuhay khaa kay billi haj ko chali’ but jokes aside, the Al Huda fad, now receding mercifully after Farhat Hashmi’s allegedly forced departure to Canada, showed us how our understanding of Islam has completely gone haywire.
One must give credit where it’s due. Our Oligarch-in-chief President Musharraf, recently nominated the 17th worst dictator of 2005, has in some ways smashed Zia-ul-Haq’s legacy with his own social liberalism. The proliferation of private channels and state patronage of art and culture has made much of this irreversible. One remembers when Zafrullah Jamali tried to clamp down on fashion shows as “against Islam” our soldier statesman put him in his place. Last year’s marathon and now this year’s repeat- though one was apprehensive that this would be another one in Musharraf’s long list of one-time experiments such as the Daylight Saving Time- and also the return of international musicians of the stature of Bryan Adams to Pakistan is just one indication that maybe General Zia-ul-Haq’s 11 years are now finally behind us, even if our understanding of Islam has not reverted to pre-1977 or some would argue pre-1974 period.
This is not enough however. Musharraf must ensure that his is the last military intervention and from 2007 onwards Pakistan will become a constitutional democracy with stability and consistency and a smooth and regular transfer of power. He should ensure that the marginalised groups, the minorities and women are no longer marginalized but get a major chunk of the Pakistani political pie not just because it was one of the stated aims at the initiation of Pakistan and not just because the world now is increasingly intolerant of militarised theocracies and oligarchies, but because only a constitutional democratic path can ensure the continuity of a socially liberal welfare state which is truly, not ritually, Islamic and therefore just and egalitarian.
In the meantime, let us run the Lahore Marathon and listen to Bryan Adams for this is the red-letter day for a new, confident and modern Pakistan.
--
Choice of Pakistan’s people
Sir: Abdul Mannan’s letter (‘The leader and the led’, January 26) proclaiming an Islamic state on behalf of the ‘masses’ misses the point. I wish to point out the following:
1. The secular-vs-Islamic debate is old, endless and useless. The relevant discussion here is about a constitutional democracy and a military-sponsored theocracy. I am sure the people of Pakistan will choose constitutional democracy, which is Jinnah’s vision, over a military theocracy any day.
2. That said why did the Jamaat-e-Islami, Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind and Majlis-e-Ahrar bitterly oppose the creation of Pakistan — denouncing it as a Kemalist state when establishing an Islamic utopia was Pakistan movement’s battle cry. The ulema opposed the creation of Pakistan because they knew the Islam Jinnah spoke of was not the Islam they wanted to impose on the masses.
3. Jinnah did speak of Islam as a positive reinforcer, not least because it was important to his constituents. But what was the nature of the Islam he spoke of? He spoke of an Islam that “came into the world for democracy” (March 1945); whose “idealism has taught us democracy” (July 1947); an Islam “in which there is no ecclesiastical state” (December 1947); of Islamic principles of “Equality, fraternity and justice for all mankind”. He repeatedly spoke of equal rights for non-Muslims. He said very clearly on at least two dozen occasions that Pakistan “shall not be a theocracy”.
4. The masses were not stupid when they chose Jinnah instead of Maududi or Madni as their leader. They were not stupid when they voted en masse for Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. They were not stupid when they voted for Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif. Even in 2002 they voted overwhelmingly for parties opposed to theocracy. When the people speak of an Islamic state, they speak of a just and egalitarian state free of corruption that is committed to peace and rule of law. The “masses” are not interested in discriminating against non-Muslims or imposing their religious views on others, as is the wont of every religious party. Elections have repeatedly shown this.
5. The lives lost in 1947 were not sacrificed to an idea. They were lost because communal violence broke out on both sides. This stigmatised, rather than glorified the idea of Pakistan.
YASSER LATIF HAMDANI
Lahore
#54 Posted by MantoLives on January 29, 2006 9:38:32 pm
Masanamuthu,
I am not responsible for your ignorance of history.
Needless to say those who are clamouring for Sharia in Pakistan- the Israr Ahmed types were hand-in-glove with the Congress in 1940s... so lets not get ahead of ourselves. The world cannot be explained in an occam`s razor... or else the United States of America would be a Puritan Commonwealth.
I am not responsible for your ignorance of history.
Needless to say those who are clamouring for Sharia in Pakistan- the Israr Ahmed types were hand-in-glove with the Congress in 1940s... so lets not get ahead of ourselves. The world cannot be explained in an occam`s razor... or else the United States of America would be a Puritan Commonwealth.
#53 Posted by Zeena on January 29, 2006 9:19:10 pm
#51 ZahraJ
Yes, we should not follow them. But,may be we are strong elements of the society. May be we have to tell those weaker elements NOT to follow them. In that way, we need to rectify our strength to strengthen the weaker ones.
Remember, society, has two elements stronger and weaker. Now, strongers are again divided in to evils and good ones, where as weakers can either be strengthened by evil stronger or good stronger. Now, if, evil strongers are pursuing weakers and brainwashing them. It is good strongers duty to make them stronger in a good way. Thanks,, nothing more to discuss.
Take care
Yes, we should not follow them. But,may be we are strong elements of the society. May be we have to tell those weaker elements NOT to follow them. In that way, we need to rectify our strength to strengthen the weaker ones.
Remember, society, has two elements stronger and weaker. Now, strongers are again divided in to evils and good ones, where as weakers can either be strengthened by evil stronger or good stronger. Now, if, evil strongers are pursuing weakers and brainwashing them. It is good strongers duty to make them stronger in a good way. Thanks,, nothing more to discuss.
Take care
#52 Posted by shantygal on January 29, 2006 8:54:44 pm
Farhat Hashmi is scary, but Nadeem, I think you give too much importance to people like JJ or Najam. Must say though this fundo chic thingie of yours is true specially among aunties. And I know some of my freinds do the hijab but not all of them are going wild about such preachers. But should add two of my freinds have ended up working and travelling for Ms. Hashmi.
#51 Posted by ZahraJ on January 29, 2006 8:25:36 pm
Re: # 50
Incomplete thought...
[There are so, many cults in the world with their followers or disciples, if, they affect our society in a negative way, then we blame them for brainwashing our society.]
Most importantly, we do not FOLLOW them!
We need to use our ``brain`` and the strange looking thing known as ``heart`` to proceed with what attracts us and discard what repels us. Now, it will be unreasonable to expect the repelling elements to disappear from the planet earth. There is a reason why they exist. Have you ever read the story of God, Moses and the big chip`kalee` (I think the correct word is chupkalee, but I do not like it. So I call it chipkalee). Also, what is appealing to you may not be appealing to others.
Lastly, it`s fine that you were not impressed by her approach and weren`t convinced by her views. If I were you I would not attend her gatherings again. Your interaction with her may have left a bad taste with you, but repeating that encounter several times is not going to make her change. I had a weird encounter with Hamza Yousuf. I decided not to attend anything by him again. I wish him well, but I do not want to subscribe to anything stated by him. He is another extreme and would be happy if muslims lived in caves, used a branch of a tree to create drawings for calculation vs using any technology device. Now, if I keep on saying him backward 10 times(remember he is impacting the minds of muslim men - even more dangerous), I am not achieving anything except for massaging my own ego.
You have made your point. You should thank your stars that you are not in Saudi Arabia where Ms. Hashmi is the assigned shurta. You have the option to pursue life as you want to.
Best Wishes.
Incomplete thought...
[There are so, many cults in the world with their followers or disciples, if, they affect our society in a negative way, then we blame them for brainwashing our society.]
Most importantly, we do not FOLLOW them!
We need to use our ``brain`` and the strange looking thing known as ``heart`` to proceed with what attracts us and discard what repels us. Now, it will be unreasonable to expect the repelling elements to disappear from the planet earth. There is a reason why they exist. Have you ever read the story of God, Moses and the big chip`kalee` (I think the correct word is chupkalee, but I do not like it. So I call it chipkalee). Also, what is appealing to you may not be appealing to others.
Lastly, it`s fine that you were not impressed by her approach and weren`t convinced by her views. If I were you I would not attend her gatherings again. Your interaction with her may have left a bad taste with you, but repeating that encounter several times is not going to make her change. I had a weird encounter with Hamza Yousuf. I decided not to attend anything by him again. I wish him well, but I do not want to subscribe to anything stated by him. He is another extreme and would be happy if muslims lived in caves, used a branch of a tree to create drawings for calculation vs using any technology device. Now, if I keep on saying him backward 10 times(remember he is impacting the minds of muslim men - even more dangerous), I am not achieving anything except for massaging my own ego.
You have made your point. You should thank your stars that you are not in Saudi Arabia where Ms. Hashmi is the assigned shurta. You have the option to pursue life as you want to.
Best Wishes.
#50 Posted by Zeena on January 29, 2006 3:33:22 pm
#49 ZahraJ
Oh,please gimme a break. For you ``Bibi`` is offensive?? Whaaaaaat?? Bibi is a word of respect for females, just like mama or madam or Miss or begum sahiba. Since, when Bibi has become offensive? My servants used to call me ,``Bibi``. Sameway, my brother or other family friends call me,``Bibi``.
When I attended Hashmi`s sermon, my frame of mind was different,b/c i was curious about her real agenda. I attended once and that is last. There is no question of respect or not. It is a question of agreement or disagreement with her views. I didn`t utter a single word of disrespect towards her teachings. rather, i was showing more respect by calling her, Bibi and Dr. Sahiba. And, also, i was not criticising on her attire.
There are so, many cults in the world with their followers or disciples, if, they affect our society in a negative way, then we blame them for brainwashing our society.
Oh,please gimme a break. For you ``Bibi`` is offensive?? Whaaaaaat?? Bibi is a word of respect for females, just like mama or madam or Miss or begum sahiba. Since, when Bibi has become offensive? My servants used to call me ,``Bibi``. Sameway, my brother or other family friends call me,``Bibi``.
When I attended Hashmi`s sermon, my frame of mind was different,b/c i was curious about her real agenda. I attended once and that is last. There is no question of respect or not. It is a question of agreement or disagreement with her views. I didn`t utter a single word of disrespect towards her teachings. rather, i was showing more respect by calling her, Bibi and Dr. Sahiba. And, also, i was not criticising on her attire.
There are so, many cults in the world with their followers or disciples, if, they affect our society in a negative way, then we blame them for brainwashing our society.
#49 Posted by ZahraJ on January 29, 2006 2:55:39 pm
Zeena,
Did you really tell her, ``Bibi .....``? That`s offensive. You must have hurt her sentiments. In my experience, I have sat with a few ulemae` karam and have had detailed discussions on some facets of life. I have not had any religious alim ever take the liberty to comment on my dress. If you want to attend any religious gatherings or sessions in future, I suggest that you attend sessions conducted by men vs. women. You may not like their views, but at least they are less curt than the women :) That`s just a personal experience. It`s your call.
So far, I have read two or three examples here where Ms. Hashmi was able to influence the naive women with her outlook toward life. She can say whatever she wants to. I blame the followers. Every leader has some following. If there is no following, then there ain`t any leadership. Ms. Hashmi must be using some principles of ``emotional intelligence`` to penetrate through the hearts and minds of her audience. Well, she sounds like a smart woman. I am sorry to say that people who have other expectations of her are not that smart. It`s not that she has a hidden agenda. Based on what I have read about her over here, I think her agenda is very clear. I think her extreme black and white messages are absurd and controversial, but you have the option to follow or not to follow. You have the option to attend her sermons or to ignore the invites. Why are you attending such sessions when you have no respect for the person conducting those sessions? That`s silly, in my view.
On a different note, thanks to ``Syriana`` and ``Munich`` for drawing more attention toward the Muslims of the world. If you have not watched the said movies, you must. If you have to pick one over the other, I will say you must watch ``Munich``.
Did you really tell her, ``Bibi .....``? That`s offensive. You must have hurt her sentiments. In my experience, I have sat with a few ulemae` karam and have had detailed discussions on some facets of life. I have not had any religious alim ever take the liberty to comment on my dress. If you want to attend any religious gatherings or sessions in future, I suggest that you attend sessions conducted by men vs. women. You may not like their views, but at least they are less curt than the women :) That`s just a personal experience. It`s your call.
So far, I have read two or three examples here where Ms. Hashmi was able to influence the naive women with her outlook toward life. She can say whatever she wants to. I blame the followers. Every leader has some following. If there is no following, then there ain`t any leadership. Ms. Hashmi must be using some principles of ``emotional intelligence`` to penetrate through the hearts and minds of her audience. Well, she sounds like a smart woman. I am sorry to say that people who have other expectations of her are not that smart. It`s not that she has a hidden agenda. Based on what I have read about her over here, I think her agenda is very clear. I think her extreme black and white messages are absurd and controversial, but you have the option to follow or not to follow. You have the option to attend her sermons or to ignore the invites. Why are you attending such sessions when you have no respect for the person conducting those sessions? That`s silly, in my view.
On a different note, thanks to ``Syriana`` and ``Munich`` for drawing more attention toward the Muslims of the world. If you have not watched the said movies, you must. If you have to pick one over the other, I will say you must watch ``Munich``.
#48 Posted by Zeena on January 29, 2006 12:11:30 pm
ZahraJ#46
Here is my point. I agree with your point of view as well, but, what i say is, i strongly feel Hashmi is going overboard in brainwashing Paki women. Yes, she is regressing their minds to the point that ultimately, it will effect their families as well. All Hashmi is teaching is ANTI AMERICAN propaganda. All she is teaching is anything and everything westernized is anti Islam.
Zahra
Look, I am a very broadminded person. If, i wear hijab or i wear shorts, i, will never teach or impose myself on others to do the samething. Just like Hashmi, I can start imposing my personal choices or teachings upon others. Like say, i call all women and start teaching them, wear shorts, do not wear hijab, do this or do that,b/c it is anti human. No, I will neer do that. I will respect Hashmi`s personal choice, but, what i call ridiculous is, when Hashmi starts imposing herself and trying her best to brainwash others against West.
Why can`t she be open? Why can`t she say, OK, this is your choice. But, what i have seen in her teachings is, she propagates absolute hatred towards westernization. She blames every evil for west. I found her a big bigot, spiritually , religiously abusive, all she is doing is palying with the actual spirit of religion and abusing religion for her own cult.
Let me tell you another interesting point. When i met her, i was wearing T-shirt and jeans. She also pointed out towards my attire. She told me, what you are wearing is, totally against Islam. This kind of dress is not permitted for muslim women. She felt threatened on my presence,b/c i was not wearing what she was wearing.
On , the other end, i did not utter a word on her dress, i did not say, what you are wearing is not permitted or is anti Islam or anti any ism.
Obviously, she was imposing herself on me and i was telling her again and again, Bibi, do what you wish to do as long as you don`t criticise my attire. Thanks
Here is my point. I agree with your point of view as well, but, what i say is, i strongly feel Hashmi is going overboard in brainwashing Paki women. Yes, she is regressing their minds to the point that ultimately, it will effect their families as well. All Hashmi is teaching is ANTI AMERICAN propaganda. All she is teaching is anything and everything westernized is anti Islam.
Zahra
Look, I am a very broadminded person. If, i wear hijab or i wear shorts, i, will never teach or impose myself on others to do the samething. Just like Hashmi, I can start imposing my personal choices or teachings upon others. Like say, i call all women and start teaching them, wear shorts, do not wear hijab, do this or do that,b/c it is anti human. No, I will neer do that. I will respect Hashmi`s personal choice, but, what i call ridiculous is, when Hashmi starts imposing herself and trying her best to brainwash others against West.
Why can`t she be open? Why can`t she say, OK, this is your choice. But, what i have seen in her teachings is, she propagates absolute hatred towards westernization. She blames every evil for west. I found her a big bigot, spiritually , religiously abusive, all she is doing is palying with the actual spirit of religion and abusing religion for her own cult.
Let me tell you another interesting point. When i met her, i was wearing T-shirt and jeans. She also pointed out towards my attire. She told me, what you are wearing is, totally against Islam. This kind of dress is not permitted for muslim women. She felt threatened on my presence,b/c i was not wearing what she was wearing.
On , the other end, i did not utter a word on her dress, i did not say, what you are wearing is not permitted or is anti Islam or anti any ism.
Obviously, she was imposing herself on me and i was telling her again and again, Bibi, do what you wish to do as long as you don`t criticise my attire. Thanks
#47 Posted by rf786 on January 29, 2006 5:22:33 am
Like many other Pakistani women, my wife was also given Dr Hashmi`s cassettes which she wud listen while driving. Listening to one of these cassttes, Dr Hashmi spoke about devil worship in the US and how virgin girls were sacrificed. Having made thius absurd statement, she also attached her cautionary statement that this was told to her by one of her disciples who she has all confidence. After hearing this absolutely outrageous statement, I just cud`nt take it anymore and my wife was quite embarrassed for even hearing this stupid women.
Pseudo-Islamic intellectuals who propagate a particlar viewpoint w/o taking into consideration the veracity of their statements are bound to be exposed, yet will carry great promise for those who wish to find faults with others without any introspection. Farhat Hashmi and her like feed upon the emotional, political and social anxieites of the muslim world. Muslims are looking for enemies to rationalize their state of affairs and blame others for their loss of prestige. Lo and behold, Farhat Hashmi walks in, blaming western ideals for all evils and showing them the road to paradise.
Being professional or not doesnt make much difference if there is not a fair representation of ideas or a fair playing field where women are not oppressed morally, socially or financially which is the case in most of the miuslim states dominated by patriachel socieities. Such traits are carried on to their new homes in western countries and there again cultural fissures are promoting importance of Farhat Hashmi who provides comfort and solace to the parents who migrated with their age old traditions.
Pseudo-Islamic intellectuals who propagate a particlar viewpoint w/o taking into consideration the veracity of their statements are bound to be exposed, yet will carry great promise for those who wish to find faults with others without any introspection. Farhat Hashmi and her like feed upon the emotional, political and social anxieites of the muslim world. Muslims are looking for enemies to rationalize their state of affairs and blame others for their loss of prestige. Lo and behold, Farhat Hashmi walks in, blaming western ideals for all evils and showing them the road to paradise.
Being professional or not doesnt make much difference if there is not a fair representation of ideas or a fair playing field where women are not oppressed morally, socially or financially which is the case in most of the miuslim states dominated by patriachel socieities. Such traits are carried on to their new homes in western countries and there again cultural fissures are promoting importance of Farhat Hashmi who provides comfort and solace to the parents who migrated with their age old traditions.
#46 Posted by ZahraJ on January 28, 2006 9:30:16 pm
Re: # 45
Zeena,
Why is it ridiculous? I still do not think that Farhat`s sermons are causing women to regress. These women are making their own decisions. Lay the blame on them as well. These women have equal responsibility in making or breaking their lives. Farhat ain`t a prophet to start changing people`s lives. One of my aunts loves her. Interestingly, the aunt who loves her has been a professor at a university in Pakistan. Now she has retired and is living in the west. She raves about her. The other aunt who has lived in this country for over 3-4 decades detests her. I just listen to both of them.
I am not willing to believe that professional women who enjoy their careers and have done well otherwise will leave everything aside after hearing Ms. Hashmi or anyone else. There has to be a reason for the move. People change. People evolve. They have to be happy in what they are doing. If this woman is happy and content with her life then who are you or I to criticize them. On the same hand, they have no right to criticize those who do not follow their line of thought. Why can`t we consider this as a change as well? As I told you that the chance that I will ever attend a such session is quite slim since I have a bad tendency of asking questions. And when I do not hear an appealing reason then I lose interest.
I respect your concern for fellow women. I think I would invest that concern elsewhere unless you have too much free energy to give to such people. Some of our women have come a long way, whereas others are living in olden days. My approach is to only associate with those who I can. The rest I do not care much for. I also do not believe in giving out positive energy to people who are not worth my time. That`s my childhood mantra.
I remembered almost a decade ago when I moved from midwest to northeast, I located the local mosque that was more of a social center. The mosque`s attendant, a very respectable lady, was interested in introducing me to a few people of my age group. I told her that I will only like to meet professional women as I cannot associate with others. To this day, I have stayed in contact with those muslim professionals. In my experience, people do respect your wishes if you are reasonable and know how to communicate your true self (what you want). There are some unreasonable creatures as well. I do not want to stereo-type but I think the kind of issues you are raising from your mosque experience, they are mainly to do with petty women. I remembered entering a mosque in MI in my business suit with knee length skirt to open the fast and a Hyderabadi lady(with a despicable accent. I cannot stand them.) jumped at me to critique my garb. I was new to that mosque(in my early 20s. Had never met such kind.), but the mosque attendant always came to me that I should visit and introduce myself to the converts. So I cared less for all these uncouth and illiterate women with petty thinking. And showed up whenever I felt like. Those were early days past my post-graduation. It`s been quite a long time since I have entered a mosque. I guess one of these days, I may land in one of the NY Mosques during the lunch hour to explore the climate :)
Zeena,
Why is it ridiculous? I still do not think that Farhat`s sermons are causing women to regress. These women are making their own decisions. Lay the blame on them as well. These women have equal responsibility in making or breaking their lives. Farhat ain`t a prophet to start changing people`s lives. One of my aunts loves her. Interestingly, the aunt who loves her has been a professor at a university in Pakistan. Now she has retired and is living in the west. She raves about her. The other aunt who has lived in this country for over 3-4 decades detests her. I just listen to both of them.
I am not willing to believe that professional women who enjoy their careers and have done well otherwise will leave everything aside after hearing Ms. Hashmi or anyone else. There has to be a reason for the move. People change. People evolve. They have to be happy in what they are doing. If this woman is happy and content with her life then who are you or I to criticize them. On the same hand, they have no right to criticize those who do not follow their line of thought. Why can`t we consider this as a change as well? As I told you that the chance that I will ever attend a such session is quite slim since I have a bad tendency of asking questions. And when I do not hear an appealing reason then I lose interest.
I respect your concern for fellow women. I think I would invest that concern elsewhere unless you have too much free energy to give to such people. Some of our women have come a long way, whereas others are living in olden days. My approach is to only associate with those who I can. The rest I do not care much for. I also do not believe in giving out positive energy to people who are not worth my time. That`s my childhood mantra.
I remembered almost a decade ago when I moved from midwest to northeast, I located the local mosque that was more of a social center. The mosque`s attendant, a very respectable lady, was interested in introducing me to a few people of my age group. I told her that I will only like to meet professional women as I cannot associate with others. To this day, I have stayed in contact with those muslim professionals. In my experience, people do respect your wishes if you are reasonable and know how to communicate your true self (what you want). There are some unreasonable creatures as well. I do not want to stereo-type but I think the kind of issues you are raising from your mosque experience, they are mainly to do with petty women. I remembered entering a mosque in MI in my business suit with knee length skirt to open the fast and a Hyderabadi lady(with a despicable accent. I cannot stand them.) jumped at me to critique my garb. I was new to that mosque(in my early 20s. Had never met such kind.), but the mosque attendant always came to me that I should visit and introduce myself to the converts. So I cared less for all these uncouth and illiterate women with petty thinking. And showed up whenever I felt like. Those were early days past my post-graduation. It`s been quite a long time since I have entered a mosque. I guess one of these days, I may land in one of the NY Mosques during the lunch hour to explore the climate :)
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- ajeya: #26 masadi Well according... Musharraf's Resignation and Beyond
- ajeya: And here's an article... Musharraf's Resignation and Beyond
- masadi: Leadenwinter writes "There is... Musharraf's Resignation and Beyond
- ajeya: More glorious stuff: http://according-to-mughal-records.blogspot.com/2008/06/exhibit-no_560 8.html ... Musharraf's Resignation and Beyond
- ajeya: Mooslas claim that hindus... Musharraf's Resignation and Beyond
- ajeya: Democracy requires criticism. Which... Musharraf's Resignation and Beyond
- tahmed32: #18 Ahmedzai: I beg... Musharraf's Resignation and Beyond
- tahmed32: Ahmedai bhai #17 i... Musharraf's Resignation and Beyond
