Understanding the Death Fatwa on Taslima Nasreen

Bkisan # 412

Wow!

Just to make sure, have you checked these are the same stories? I haven't followed the discussion.

Bkisan,

Are you pakistani? Would you please capture the spiritual core of Shanti (aka Islam in Arabic) so that we could indianize Shanti.

Re: # 274

HP commented that he had not read any of these stories before and tried to caste doubt upon them. He has in fact read them previously and commented upon them too:

He read them here:
http://www.chowk.com/interacts/7342/1/0/144#170277

Romair bhai: Here are the answers to your questions. Since it is quite long I will just put up a little part here and the URL and allow you to read the rest for yourself:

http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/misc/alshifa/pt4intro.htm

Part Four
The judgements concerning those who think
the Prophet imperfect or curse him

Section Two
The proof of the necessity of killing anyone who
curses the Prophet or finds fault with him


The Qur`an says that Allah curses the one who harms the Prophet in this world and He connected harm of Himself to harm of the Prophet. There is no dispute that anyone who curses Allah is killed and that his curse demands that he be categorised as an unbeliever. The judgement of the unbeliever is that he is killed.

Allah says, ``Those who harm Allah and His Messenger, Allah has cursed them in this world and in the Next, and has prepared for them a humiliating punishment.`` (33:57). He said something similar about those who kill the believers. Part of the curse on them in this world is that they are killed. Allah says, ``Cursed they will be. Wherever they are found, they are seized and all slain.`` (33: 61) He mentions the punishment of those who fight, ``That is humiliation in this world for them.`` (5:45) ``Killing`` (qatl) can have the meaning of ``curse``.[6] Allah says, ``May the conjecturers be killed!`` (51:11) and ``May Allah fight them! How they are perverted!`` (9:30) i.e. may Allah curse them.

This is because there is a difference between their harming Allah and His Messenger and harming the believers. Injuring the believers, short of murder, incurs beating and exemplary punishment. The judgement against those who harm Allah and His Prophet is more severe - the death penalty.

Allah says, ``No, by your Lord, they will not believe until they have you judge between them in what they disagree about.`` (4:65) He removes the badge of belief from those who find an impediment in themselves against accepting the Prophet?s judgement and do not submit to him. Anyone who disparages him is opposing his judgement.

Allah says, ``O you who believe, do not raise your voices above the voice of the Prophet and be not loud in your speech to him as you are loud to one another lest your actions fail.`` (49:3). Such an action only comes about through disbelief and the unbeliever is killed.

Allah says, ``When they come to you, they greet you with a greeting which Allah never greeted you with.`` Then He says, ``Jahannam is enough for them, an evil homecoming.`` (58:9)

Allah says, ``Among them are those who harm the Prophet and say that he is all ear,`` (9:61) and, ``Those who harm the Messenger of Allah have a painful punishment.`` (9:63)

Allah says, ``If you ask them, they will say, `We were only plunging and playing.` Say, `What, were you then mocking Allah, His signs and His Messenger? Make no excuses. You have disbelieved after your belief.``` (9:67-68) The commentators say, ``You have disbelieved`` refers to what they have said about the Messenger of Allah.

We have already mentioned the consensus. As for the traditions, al-Husayn ibn `Ali related from his father that the Messenger of Allah said in respect of this matter, ``Whoever curses a Prophet, kill him. Whoever curses my Companions, beat him.``[7]

In a sound hadith the Prophet commanded that Ka`b ibn al-Ashraf be killed. He asked, ``Who will deal with Ka`b ibn al-Ashraf? He has harmed Allah and His Messenger.`` He sent someone to assassinate him without calling him to Islam, in distinction to other idol-worshippers. The cause of that lay in his causing harm to the Prophet. That indicates that the Prophet had him killed for something other than idol-worship. It was for causing harm. Abu Rafi,` who used to harm the Messenger of Allah and work against him, was also killed.

Similarly on the Day of the Conquest, he ordered the killing of Ibn Khatal and his two slavegirls who used to sing his curses on the Prophet.

In another hadith about a man who used to curse the Prophet, the Prophet said, ``Who will save me from my enemy?`` Khalid said, ``I will,`` so the Prophet sent him out and he killed him.

Similarly the Prophet commanded that a group of unbelievers who used to injure and curse him, like an-Nadr ibn al-Harith and `Uqba ibn Abi Mu`ayt, be killed. He promised that a group of them would be killed before and after the conquest. They were all killed except for those who hurried to become Muslim before they were overpowered. Al-Bazzar related from Ibn `Abbas that `Uqba ibn Abi Mu`ayt cried out, ``O company of Quraysh, why is it that I alone among you am to be killed without war?`` The Prophet said, ``For your disbelief and your forging lies against the Messenger of Allah.``

`Abdu`r-Razzaq mentioned that a man cursed the Prophet, causing the Prophet to say, ``Who will save me from my enemy?`` Az-Zubayr said, ``I will.`` He sent az-Zubayr and he killed him.

It is related that a woman used to curse the Prophet and he said, ``Who will save me from my enemy?`` Khalid ibn al-Walid went out and killed her.

It is related that a man forged lies against the Prophet and he sent `Ali and az-Zubayr to kill him.

Ibn Qani` related that a man came to the Prophet and said, ``Messenger of Allah, I heard my father say something ugly about you, so I killed him,`` and that did not distress the Prophet.

Al-Mujahir ibn Abi Umayya, the Amir of Yemen, reported to Abu Bakr that a woman there in the time of the Ridda[8]chanted curses against the Prophet, so he cut off her hand and pulled out her front teeth. When Abu Bakr heard that, he said to him, ``If you had not done what you already did, I would have commanded you to kill her because the hadd regarding the Prophet is not like the hadd regarding others.``

Ibn `Abbas said that a woman from Khatma[9] satirised the Prophet and the Prophet said, ``Who will deal with her for me?`` A man from her people said, ``I will, Messenger of Allah.`` The man got up and went and killed her. He told the Prophet who said, ``Two goats will not lock horns over her.``[10]

Ibn `Abbas said that a blind man had an umm walad who used to curse the Prophet. He scolded her and restrained her, but she would not be restrained. That night she began to attack and revile the Prophet, so he killed her. He told the Prophet about that and he said he had shed her blood with impunity.[11]

In the hadith of Abu Barza as-Aslami it says, ``One day I was sitting with Abu Bakr as-Siddiq and he became angry at one of the Muslim men.`` Qadi Isma`il and other Imams said that the man had cursed Abu Bakr. An-Nasa`i related it as, ``I came to Abu Bakr and a man had been rude and answered him back. I said, `Khalif of Allah, let me strike off his head!` He said, `Sit down. That is not for anyone except the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace.`

Qadi Abu Muhammad ibn Nasr said, ``No one disagreed with him.`` So the Imams take this, as a proof that anyone who does anything that might anger, harm or curse the Prophet in any way should be killed.


There is also the letter of `Umar ibn `Abdu`l-`Aziz to his governor in Kufa. He had asked his advice about killing a man who had cursed `Umar. `Umar wrote back to him, ``It is not lawful to kill a Muslim for cursing anyone except the Messenger of Allah. Whoever curses him, his blood is lawful.``

Harun ar-Rashid asked Malik about a man who had reviled the Prophet and he mentioned to him that the fuqaha` of Iraq had given a fatwa that he be flogged. Malik became angry and said, ``Amir al-Mu`minin! There is no continuation for a community after it curses its Prophet! Whoever curses the Companions of the Prophet is to be flogged.``

I do not know which of those Iraqi fuqaha` gave Harun ar-Rashid that fatwa. We have already mentioned that the school of the people of Iraq[12] is that he be killed. Perhaps they were among those who were not known for knowledge or those whose fatwas were unreliable or idiosyncratic, or it is possible that what the man said was not taken to be a curse and there was a dispute as to whether or not it was a curse or he had retracted it and repented of it. None of these things were mentioned to Malik at all. However, the consensus is that anyone who curses him is to be killed as we have already stated.

That he is to be killed can be deduced by reflection and consideration. Anyone who curses or disparages the Prophet has shown clear symptoms of the sickness of his heart and proof of his real convictions and belief. That is why most of the `ulama` judge him to be an apostate. This is what is transmitted by the people of Syria from Malik, al-Awza`i, ath-Thawri, Abu Hanifa and the people of Kufa.

The other position is that it is not a proof of disbelief, and so the person in question is killed by the hadd-punishment but he is not adjudged to be an unbeliever unless he persists in his words, not denying them nor refraining from them. To be judged an unbeliever, his statement must either be a clear statement of disbelief, like calling the Prophet a liar, or originate from mocking words and censure. His open avowal of what he said and lack of repentance for it is an indication that he finds it lawful and this constitutes disbelief, so there is no disagreement that he is an unbeliever. Allah says about people like this, ``They swear by Allah that they did not speak. They said the words of disbelief. They disbelieved after their Islam.`` (9:76)

The commentators said that this refers to the statement, ``If what is said by Muhammad is true,[13] we are worse than monkeys.``

It is said that it refers to what one of them[14] said, ``Our likeness with respect to that of Muhammad is only as the words of the one who says, `Feed your dog and it will devour you.` When we return to Madina, the mighty will drive out the weaker.``

It is said that even if the one who says this conceals it, the same judgement applies to him as to the heretic and he is killed because he has changed his deen. The Prophet said, ``Strike off the heads of all who change their deen.``

Because upholding the Prophet`s honour is an obligation owed by his entire community and anyone who curses a free man of his community is given a hadd-punishment, the punishment of someone who curses the Prophet is that he is to be is killed because of the immensity of the worth of the Prophet and his elevation over others.

He then commented upon them here:
http://www.chowk.com/interacts/7342/1/0/128#170293

Taslima Nasreen wrote the following interesting article after this fatwa fiasco:

OPINION
It Feels, Speaks, Smells Like Home
If not East Bengal, perhaps West Bengal? All I want is to be with people of my culture, to write in my language.


Taslima Nasreen


| e-mail | one page format | feedback: send - read |


What is my crime? My crime is that I have found that Islam does not consider woman a separate human being. Man is the original creation and womankind was created secondarily for the pleasure of man. Islam considers woman a slave, a sexual object and a son-producing machine. The Hadith says that two prayers that never reach the heavens are: those of escaping slaves and of women who frustrate their husbands at night.

Islam considers women psychologically inferior. In Islamic law, the testimony of two women is worth that of one man. In a case where a man suspects his wife of adultery or denies the legitimacy of the offspring, his testimony is worth that of four witnesses.



Bangladesh doesn`t want me. So if India gives me a home, why should it concern Bangladesh at all?


A woman does not have the right to charge her husband likewise. Women cannot inherit property equally with their brothers.

And after all the rights and freedom, after getting all the sexual pleasure and pleasure of being the masters, men will


be rewarded with wine, food, and 72 virgins in Paradise, including their wives on earth. And what is the reward for a pious woman? Nothing. Nothing but the same old husband, the same man who caused her suffering while they were on earth. It became clear to me that the male of the species had written the holy Quran for its own interest, its own comfort, its own fun. Then I studied other religions, and I found they, too, oppressed women. Far too many women are trafficked and sold into slavery. Men throw acid on their bodies, burn their faces, smash their noses, melt their eyes, and walk away with impunity.

They are beaten, flogged, stoned to death. Women are raped, then accused of having allowed the rape, and the rapists are set free. Violence against women in not a crime in my country.

Nobody taught me to protest, but from an early age I learnt the importance


Some say this might worsen India`s ties with Bangladesh. When I stay in America or Europe, do their relations worsen?




of fighting against oppression. I wanted to write books so that I could change this. Wanting to do something constructive, I wrote about the need for women to understand why they are oppressed and why they should fight back. For centuries, women have been taught that they must not speak out against their abusers. Through my writings, I tried to encourage women to fight for their rights and freedom. My voice gave women the chance to think differently.

That did not please the religious fundamentalists, of course. They grew enraged when I said that religious law, which discriminates against women, needs to be replaced by a secular law with a uniform civil code. Before long, hundreds of thousands of extremists appeared on the streets and demanded my execution by hanging. A fatwa was issued against me, setting a price on my head. The government, instead of taking action against the fundamentalists, took action against me. I was charged with blasphemy. An arrest warrant was issued. I had to go into hiding, and later, in 1994, forced to leave my country. Since then, I have tried to go back home many times, but with no luck. Instead of being able to live where I was born and brought up, I had to go and live in western Europe, where I was condemned to a life term as an outsider. How to express that hopeless, helpless feeling: a stranger in my own country, and a stranger in the West.

My only hope now is West Bengal. I have never distinguished between the two Bengals. For me they are inseparable. My parents were born in undivided India, not I. But I did feel the pain of partition. Nearly a decade ago I wrote: ``India wasn`t a scrap of paper that it could be torn into pieces. The people who fought in 1971 wiped away the two-nation theory, proved that Muslim unity was a myth``; ``we are extending our hands towards each other and between us stands the monster of religious boundaries``. For this, I was called a traitor in Bangladesh.

The torture of innocents inspired me to write my documentary novel Lajja. When I spoke about Hindus being oppressed, Muslims called me a plaything of Hindu fundamentalists. When I received a prestigious literary award in India, I became an outcast in the literary circle of Bangladesh. They called me an agent of raw. I didn`t even know the meaning of raw then!

Since I started writing, I`ve faced lies and constant character assassination. Religion is the biggest obstacle in the path of freedom of women; but whenever I say this, I fall into the clutches of fundamentalists. They were angry with me from the beginning but gradually I found even moderate Muslims became my enemies. When I was forced to leave my country, I kept hoping the situation would improve someday and I`d finally go home. But I couldn`t have been more wrong.

No matter which party came to power in the last 12 years, the government`s agenda remained the same as far as my fate was concerned: I was barred from entering my own country. The political parties thought alike: if they allow me in, they would be labelled anti-religious and lose votes. Western Europe has given me asylum. That`s given me some security, but it`s not home. Repeatedly I tried to return to Bangladesh. Not being able to do so tore me to bits. Then I found the other Bengal. If not home to East Bengal, perhaps I could go to West Bengal, to Calcutta, a place that was almost home? But that wasn`t easy either. India`s doors stayed shut for me for six years, from 1994 to 1999.

The door finally opened—if you can deem it thus—in November `99. I was granted a tourist visa. Any tourist with a European passport can get a visa from an Indian embassy abroad. But my case was different. My appeal had to be sent to Delhi and a visa came with endless caveats. If I wanted a visa for three months, I got it for perhaps three days. After a few visits, I tried for anything that would let me stay here longer: citizenship, if not that, a residential permit.

Was I asking for too much? I am not taking anyone`s job. All I want is to live a writer`s life. As a writer I crave for my language, to live with people who share my culture—is that so unjustified? Western Europe saved my life; I can`t help but hope India will save me as a writer. There are writers who can write in exile, living in a country where no one speaks her language or understands her culture. I can`t. There are many who leave their own country willingly. I haven`t.

As a writer, I need India for many reasons. In Europe and the US, I may find asylum but I will always stand apart as an outsider, either because of my colour or culture. Here in India, no matter which city or state I travel in, I don`t ever feel like a foreigner, I merge easily into the crowd. I need that melting down in order to be able to write.

India is a vast country. From the beginning of history, innumerable people ended up in this cul de sac. Some have visited and then left, others have stayed, sending their roots firmly down. India has always warmly embraced every stranger, people of different colours, languages, religions, ethnicity and opinions. The door was ever open to an outsider. With hundreds of languages and cultures, India is unique in its generosity to the stranger. So why is there no place for me?

I`ve never asked for political asylum from India. All I want is to be able to live here. I might breathe in a distant land somewhere, but my heart is in Bengal. So why is my appeal to live here dealt with politically? Some argue that if India were to grant me citizenship, then her relationship with Bangladesh would worsen. As if I were a common criminal wanted back home that India is harbouring! Fact is, Bangladesh doesn`t want me.So if India gives me a home, why should it concern Bangladesh at all? When I stay in Europe and America, does it worsen their relationship with Bangladesh? Instead, I imagine Bangladesh heaving a sigh of relief if India grants me shelter, like going to an aunt after fighting with your mother.

I can`t help recalling those days when authors from the West joined together to save me. They not only put pressure on their own governments but also prevailed on the European Union to save a writer from oblivion. It was thanks to their efforts that governments in the West were compelled to save me from being hanged. Then followed a kind of tug-of-war between various countries. Norway, Sweden, Germany, everyone wanted me to live with them. Granting me residency or even citizenship was a prestige issue for them: it would ensure them fame.

I don`t know who decides whether or not I stay in West Bengal. Some say the government wants to please the Muslims. Some say it`s the intellectuals who`re afraid, or jealous. Did West Bengal ever love me? Yes, she did. Annadasankar Roy, a famous free thinker, once said affectionately that ``Bangladesh is Taslima`s mother and West Bengal her aunt``. When I talked of women`s rights, I got a hard kick from Bangladesh and a kiss from West Bengal. Actually it`s not the country which kicks or kisses, but the people. I have noticed that the number of secular and rational people here is far more than in Bangladesh.

And just as I love East Bengal, return again and again at its door even when I`ve been thrown out, just so do I love and return here to West Bengal.

Re: #409

I could say bad things about your mother too.

But ask yourself - you are cursing the Brahmins for holding your community`s progress back - but Brahmins are a relatively recent phenomenon in most parts of the Indian subcontinent - WHY were your forefathers devoid of any literary, scientific, artistic or philosophical achievements BEFORE the Brahmins ever showed up?

Instead of behaving like the snot-nosed little punk that you are, TRY TO ANSWER THIS.

When you find you have no answer, ask me - I`ll tell you.

You may not like the answer too much.

`` I`m sorry to tell you this, but your EEGs are still flat. :)) ``

Dude, outting a :)) after your comment does not make it funny. That was like the lamest comeback ever...



``Now, now. Don`t get emotional. It`s not your fault that you are a low performer. You are doing the best with what you got. ``

And I am quite content. U are the one who seems to be full of rage. Sux to be you I guess.


``Touched a nerve, eh? :) But you can get over you being born into the shallow end of the gene pool. Work hard. Have you tried animal husbandry? Talk to Jang. He`ll fix you up with something. :) ``

Actually, thank you for helping me recognize the true enemy. It is within the Hindu fold and it is called Brahmin.



``Easier said than done, numbnuts. :) We Brahmins are going to order you around as long as we want. :) Heh heh heh... ``

Right, and I will sit here and call you a son of a filth ridden devdaasi whore :) Thank you, come again!!


``We get rewarded on merit. Unlike you lowlives. You mofokkers are the leeches. Not us.

Now go see if you can get a free handout. That`s the best you can do with your low grades. :))
``

Oh puhleeze. At least the Mozzies screw those who are outside of their religion. U lot srew your own co-religionists. It is good to see you lot get your just desserts.

#404 by stuka

[HAHA, what flatliner u mofo? I am sitting here in front of my screen typing out curses to a damn Brhamin all thanks to education and socio-economic development and there is nothing your mantra chanting arse can do about it. Hey, Life is good. ]

I`m sorry to tell you this, but your EEGs are still flat. :))



[Dude, are you actually that idiotic? What statement do u have to prove that you are anything beyond a high school grad? Besides, I don`t think I even knew any poor Brahmins. In fact, come to think of it, I didn;t really know any poor people. HAHAHA...So, the poor Brahmins can go screw themselves..I don`t give a shit. ]

Now, now. Don`t get emotional. It`s not your fault that you are a low performer. You are doing the best with what you got.


[And isn`t that the truth as you percieve it you racist sonofabitch. This ultimatly is your Hindutva Dream, Brahmin master race ruling over the rest of the Hindus. Well, ain`t gonna happen. You fcukers have seen the last of your political power..and now with steady erosion of Brahminical influence in the private sector, there will soon be limbo for the Brahmin race in India. The example set by Tamil Nadu will spread across the rest of the country. ]

Touched a nerve, eh? :) But you can get over you being born into the shallow end of the gene pool. Work hard. Have you tried animal husbandry? Talk to Jang. He`ll fix you up with something. :)


[``But I think you should see that it is very obvious to everyone on Chowk how you are constantly trying to cozy up to HP and other mooslas, and them giving you the dhimmi treatment as prescribed in the koran. Why don`t you ``convert`` and become another pedophile-follower?``

You would like that, right? U long to the Hindu Mullah with the power to excommunicate. Wellm screw you. I remain Hindu and Proud. And I hate and despise only one Hindu caste, the Brahmin. The Brahmin is the enemy of the Hindu, to be exterminated from the Hindu religion so that all other castes can coexist in peace. ]

Easier said than done, numbnuts. :) We Brahmins are going to order you around as long as we want. :) Heh heh heh...


[Well, I am quite happy making the grade in the Hindu religion. As far as leaving it, how can I? It is so much easier to destroy the Brahmin`s hold from within, rather than without. You see, I am proud to be a Hindu and I am proud of hating Brahmins. You know lot are parasites]

We get rewarded on merit. Unlike you lowlives. You mofokkers are the leeches. Not us.

Now go see if you can get a free handout. That`s the best you can do with your low grades. :))

#405 Sattar2

[no religion preaches fanaticism]

Very well-said, sir! In fact, doing so would probably negate the very purpose of any religion - the seeking of spiritual satisfaction.

bjkumar (#397),

You have a point in that fanaticism may define all religions, and not exclusively Islam.

My view is that all religions … Judaism, Hinduism, Christianity, Zorastrianism, Islam, and many others … originated from the same Source. In my view, no religion preaches fanaticism. How followers choose to apply its teachings is a different issue altogether.

Fanatic behavior pattern may emerge as emphasis of followers shifts from peace and justice for all to a power-usurping, political ideology. Present day ummah tends to lean more in favor of rigidity and forceful imposition, and less towards reasoning and compromise.

My comment (hatred being mainstream Islam’s defining aspect in this day and age) was meant to underscore the way in which mainstream Islam is responding, as well as being viewed, across the globe, today.

``
Brahmins have been, are and will always remain amongst the top elites of India in every sphere of life.``

Yup, we agree that they are parasites.

``Nothing that you flatliners can do anything about. Go line up outside V.P Singh`s door for handouts.``

HAHA, what flatliner u mofo? I am sitting here in front of my screen typing out curses to a damn Brhamin all thanks to education and socio-economic development and there is nothing your mantra chanting arse can do about it. Hey, Life is good.



``[Actually I have no shortcoming.]
What do you have to back that statement up? How do you explain your inferior grades and substandard performance in anything competitive? How come much poorer Brahmins scored higher than you?

Eh?``

Dude, are you actually that idiotic? What statement do u have to prove that you are anything beyond a high school grad? Besides, I don`t think I even knew any poor Brahmins. In fact, come to think of it, I didn;t really know any poor people. HAHAHA...So, the poor Brahmins can go screw themselves..I don`t give a shit.



[I being very comfoptrable in my skin hating you Nazi lot right back. ]

``You are inferior. So I don`t blame you for becoming a commie. Because that is one way you can get equal treatment compared to people who actually have brains.``


And isn`t that the truth as you percieve it you racist sonofabitch. This ultimatly is your Hindutva Dream, Brahmin master race ruling over the rest of the Hindus. Well, ain`t gonna happen. You fcukers have seen the last of your political power..and now with steady erosion of Brahminical influence in the private sector, there will soon be limbo for the Brahmin race in India. The example set by Tamil Nadu will spread across the rest of the country.


``But I think you should see that it is very obvious to everyone on Chowk how you are constantly trying to cozy up to HP and other mooslas, and them giving you the dhimmi treatment as prescribed in the koran. Why don`t you ``convert`` and become another pedophile-follower?``

You would like that, right? U long to the Hindu Mullah with the power to excommunicate. Wellm screw you. I remain Hindu and Proud. And I hate and despise only one Hindu caste, the Brahmin. The Brahmin is the enemy of the Hindu, to be exterminated from the Hindu religion so that all other castes can coexist in peace.

``Of course, caste being a big deal amongst cutloos in Pakiland, you will never get to be the equals of types like Ali_1, HP, Mantolives and Urstruly. But you might manage to marry into a family from the lower end. ``

So, you think that Ali, HP and Manto are from the ``higher end``? You mean they are Brahmins who converted to Islam? WOW, your Brahminical status does not have a strong pull if people are converting to Islam right?

``I`m not sure what is stopping you from leaving the Hindu religion. Go join the pedophile worshippers. That`s one place you`ll make the grade. :)``

Well, I am quite happy making the grade in the Hindu religion. As far as leaving it, how can I? It is so much easier to destroy the Brahmin`s hold from within, rather than without. You see, I am proud to be a Hindu and I am proud of hating Brahmins. You know lot are parasites :)

#398 by stuka

[Actually you have to figure out how we can game a system where your caste is approaching complete powerlessness from a socio-economic standpoint. Check out the UP elections for instance, the Brahmin is a political orphan nowhere close to the epicenter of power. ]

Brahmins have been, are and will always remain amongst the top elites of India in every sphere of life.

Nothing that you flatliners can do anything about. Go line up outside V.P Singh`s door for handouts.



[Actually I have no shortcoming.]

What do you have to back that statement up? How do you explain your inferior grades and substandard performance in anything competitive? How come much poorer Brahmins scored higher than you?

Eh?


[I being very comfoptrable in my skin hating you Nazi lot right back. ]

You are inferior. So I don`t blame you for becoming a commie. Because that is one way you can get equal treatment compared to people who actually have brains.

But I think you should see that it is very obvious to everyone on Chowk how you are constantly trying to cozy up to HP and other mooslas, and them giving you the dhimmi treatment as prescribed in the koran. Why don`t you ``convert`` and become another pedophile-follower?

Of course, caste being a big deal amongst cutloos in Pakiland, you will never get to be the equals of types like Ali_1, HP, Mantolives and Urstruly. But you might manage to marry into a family from the lower end. And forget about marrying into a cutloo family from Iran or anywhere in the middle east. They treat your masters like dogs, so they won`t even spit on you.

I`m not sure what is stopping you from leaving the Hindu religion. Go join the pedophile worshippers. That`s one place you`ll make the grade. :)

samar, the way I see it is..God is spiritual . Religion is both political and spiritual.(because it is about identity). So from an atheist`s point of view, a believer would probably stress more on the spiritual aspect, than the political.(There is someone like advani who says he is an atheist/political Hindu)So.....my apprehension when zeemax talks about political context of religion. But may be this yardstick does not apply to Islam because Islam , as zeemax said, is ``the complete code of all existence and non-existence simplified and put in a few authoritative terms.``

Re: # 402, rahul_capri,

`Religion is both political and spiritual.`

If you permit me, I will slightly modify your comment. Religion, essentially is political and the spiritual aspect of it is just a tool to organize people behind itself for use as a fodder in battles for gaining power. In other words it is rather against the genuine individual spirituality as people would practice if allowed to. In this respect I like the honesty of Zeemax who seldom discusses spirituality aspect of Islam which, he knows, is fast losing its sheen of spirituality. This doesn`t mean that other Abrahmic religions still have that sheen but they have already accepted the fact that religions have lost their spirituality long ago. As for the eastern religions, they have altogether different concept of spirituality, perhaps bordering philosophy.

Samar

It following sentences by kaal and zee helped me understand the interaction on this board.
``Still, to reiterate, at this time, this view is based on nothing more than semi-deductive guess work and hunches.``
``Islam actually is the complete code of all existence and non-existence simplified and put in a few authoritative terms.``
If I ever need religion, I have got enough pointers here..(Though it may be a different religion and I may reach different answers).
On another note,kaalchakra, I am surprised how someone can believe in religion to the extent you do without believing in God. By that token, I consider zeemax too as a closet atheist,since he seems to believe in religion more than he believes in God. But of course ,I realize that seeing God and religion as separate is more the result of my ``westoxicated education`` (thanx echo) ,than anything else.

Re: # 400, rahul_capri,

It needs no ``westoxicated education`` to contend that if you believe in God then believing in anything other than God is not believing in God and therefore is blasphemy. So you are right that not only Zees on Chowk but everyone who believes in scriptures and their interpretations by some human beings are atheists or agnostics. When you know beforehand you stop trying to know. You only have concepts which is not God.

Samar

kaal,

Commenting on your half-baked theories would be futile.

MiaN, you may also pass gas, tell me it smells good, and ask me “why”. One plausible explanation would be that … you’re finally getting used to having your head stuck up your arse. I offer the same explanation to your ideas about Ahmedism; hope this suffices for now.

+++

zeemax (#386),

Problem lies not with carrying the “flag”, but with wearing a suicide belt! And don’t overlook the possibility that liberals may be shunning Islam … due to its forceful imposition by your ullema in the first place. Entertaining this possibility may open doors to a better formulation of your dilemma.

C’mon now, do you really want me to quote Maudoodi??? Or you may simply ask Urstruly about Islamic punishment for apostasy, adultery, and blasphemy.

``#394 by krishna_abcd on April 29, 2007 4:17pm PT
#382 by stuka

[I have done reading and don`t need to learn shit from you, you Brahmin motherfukker. Now shut the fukk up before I bitch slap your ass back to Banaras. Bhainchod. ]

It is one thing to say these things on Chowk. It is quite another to carry out these threats in person. While it is not really pertinent to the argument, the chances are quite high that if we met in person, I would be able to shove your foot inside your mouth. ``

And chances are that I would leave your asshole gaping like the Chunnel.

``But that is neither here nor there. ``

Exactly!!!

``I think you have to look into your own upbringing and genes to figure out why you are at the lower end of every performance index academically, while thousands of Brahmins from families far poorer than yours perform far above you at every level of academics.

But that would require some thought. So might as well go and queue up outside V.P. Singh`s office. ``

Actually you have to figure out how we can game a system where your caste is approaching complete powerlessness from a socio-economic standpoint. Check out the UP elections for instance, the Brahmin is a political orphan nowhere close to the epicenter of power.



``[Well, I am telling u to fukk off right now, aren`t I, u polluted product of a Devdasi and Brahmin.

I would rather teach your whore of a mother not to raise a son who talks back to her pimp. ]

My mother is the end product of thousands of years of erudition and culture. If you ever were in the same room as my mother, you, and everyone else present would see the obvious difference in class, character and personality. You are a no-good low-class closet-dalit trying to blame every Brahmin for your lack of brains and every other shortcoming. ``

Actually I have no shortcoming. If I was to stand next to you and your mother, I would see obvious differences in terms of you lot being a bunch of hate filled bigots and I being very comfoptrable in my skin hating you Nazi lot right back.

``I think your time would be better spent greasing up and bending over for assorted mooslas like HP and Urstruly. Because pretty soon your pedophile-worshipping girlfriend is going to be applying that pencil sharpener to your excuse for a penis. ``

And that`s what ot somes down to, you erudite Brahmin piece of shit. If anything its your unstaisfied Brahmin mom who must have opened her thighs for HER KHATRI CHOWKIDAR. NO WONDER U ARE SO FULL OF PISS AND VINEGAR. hahaha! Fucking dickhead ABCD!!

#396 Sattar2

Sattar2 sahib. For what it is worth, I do not personally believe that hatred is a defining aspect of Islam – any more than it is for any other religion – in the sense that hatred is a core emotion which afflicts all humans in varying degrees and at varying times!

What I do believe is that many followers of Islam (i.e., those on the “inside”) find themselves at a disadvantage in asking questions of enquiring nature and they may have misgivings but may be unable to even suggest those questions because the followers of the Mullah-types insist it is a REQUIREMENT for a believer to read from prepared script. This would stifle the ability of individuals (from the “inside”) to be able to ask questions that may perturb them – for fear of being “found” apostates.

Unlike what you say, I do not believe that all of the Ummah’s “problems” stem from within. However, the weaknesses which stop it from disallowing the projection of any core hatred of perhaps what is a numerically very small minority to a larger population – those weaknesses certainly appear to lie within.

That is why the likes of the Gill make every attempt to encourage a questioning mind – and the reason why the likes of this interactor value him – crappy write-up and all!

That is how I see it – I, of course, have no expertise on this subject.

Nor on any other subjects! (I seem to utterly lack the power of clairvoyance, from all accounts.)

bjkumar (#376),

I think stuka was merely explaining kaal’s motives, without necessarily suggesting that Islam’s problem is merely that of PR.

Yes, there are real jihadis blowing up people. An outlook marred by such hatred is perhaps a defining aspect of mainstream Islam in this day and age. Ummah’s problems stem from within, and not from an external source - agreed. And in that sense, kaal is on the right track when he suggests that Ahmedism appears to be a real and genuine threat to Islam.

kirshna (#380),

I should interject on issue of (supposedly crappy) treatment of a dhimmi by a Muslim.

While such treatment of non-Muslims may be supported by ummah, it squares off neither with my understanding of Islam, nor with my take on issues pertaining to human dignity. There is Islam, and then there is Islam; and the two can be very different.

I think Zeemax and Kaalchakra should open a mutual admiration society. Members, upon paying a (hefty) membership fee, would be allowed to sing unrestricted songs in praise of each other.

I can not afford the membership fee, of course, but will be happy to serve as the treasurer, keeping a small portion of the proceeds as my commission.

#382 by stuka

[I have done reading and don`t need to learn shit from you, you Brahmin motherfukker. Now shut the fukk up before I bitch slap your ass back to Banaras. Bhainchod. ]

It is one thing to say these things on Chowk. It is quite another to carry out these threats in person. While it is not really pertinent to the argument, the chances are quite high that if we met in person, I would be able to shove your foot inside your mouth.

But that is neither here nor there.

I think you have to look into your own upbringing and genes to figure out why you are at the lower end of every performance index academically, while thousands of Brahmins from families far poorer than yours perform far above you at every level of academics.

But that would require some thought. So might as well go and queue up outside V.P. Singh`s office.



[Well, I am telling u to fukk off right now, aren`t I, u polluted product of a Devdasi and Brahmin.

I would rather teach your whore of a mother not to raise a son who talks back to her pimp. ]

My mother is the end product of thousands of years of erudition and culture. If you ever were in the same room as my mother, you, and everyone else present would see the obvious difference in class, character and personality. You are a no-good low-class closet-dalit trying to blame every Brahmin for your lack of brains and every other shortcoming.

I think your time would be better spent greasing up and bending over for assorted mooslas like HP and Urstruly. Because pretty soon your pedophile-worshipping girlfriend is going to be applying that pencil sharpener to your excuse for a penis.

#392 by khurram,

I try khurram, but usually people are not interested in an honest discourse but rather material to hurl back at the other. With those I have had no choice but to become a `Ghazi Illum-Din` :)

Re: #391 zeemax
Great post! Why can`t you always write like this?

#390 by kaalchakra ,

You know, it is shocking how few educated and liberal Muslims even make any remotely serious attempt to study what makes Islam tick, let alone the non-Muslims.

The features of Islam are so vast that these can be quite mind boggling. When Maulanas say ``Islam is a complete code of life (mukammal zaabta-e-hyat)``, they are not wrong but all they`re referring to is the prescribed code of daily life, morality, social values, family values, jurisprudence, penal code, rituals, etc.; that`s just one part. Islam actually is the complete code of all existence and non-existence simplified and put in a few authoritative terms.

I don`t fault the Maulanas for that because they either have no exposure to evolution of western philosophical thought, or even those who do such as Dr. Israr, do not understand them very well or are limited to ancient philosophies of Aristotle and others with again no exposure of recent powerful trends such as existentialism. But I do fault the liberals for doing that.

Most Pakistani liberals do have the necessary exposure to all the above but do not make an attempt to assimilate what they`ve learnt from those and place them vis-a-vis the intrinsic Islamic thought. They dismiss Islam as something archaic and outdated, and kind of stigmatic to even consider. Further, they see it as a threat to their way of life for the reason that their way of life came into being through the industrial revolution and fall of the church (religion), and in an identical manner equate fall of societal / political Islam as a pre-condition to progress of Muslims. That is a fatal mistake and a dreadful miscalculation which can only exacerbate their problems.

Islam is perfectly compatible with progress, `but` towards ultimately egalitarian goals. Accumulation of wealth is fine but running after it blindly and selfishly is `shirk`. Interest (sood) is haram only because making money from money alone rather than rewards of physical activity in business and commerce is unjustified and creates a usurper class. All these are simple concepts which promote progress and innovation, rather than retard it. These are just two examples and far from exhaustive. There are many more.

Next what puts them off is the political Islam which can be ruthless, violent, and unrelenting in achieving its writ. Thereby the label of Islamofascism. It is because Islam does not recognize any authority `above` its own (i.e. sovereignty of Allah) in its own sphere, however big or small it may be. It can coexist on a global basis, but at the very minimum it may be willing to do so on an equal footing and no less. Whenever it is dismissed as unequal, or worse challenged in its own sphere, it will become `Islamofascist` in all connotations of the word. Then it will regenerate in its harshest form from within itself and crush everything in its path. You see, `Allah`s Will` cannot be abandoned or there will be no more Islam.

This is what you see happening in Pakistan right now and the federal interior minister almost got killed yesterday. If he had not miraculously escaped death, the process would be accelerated through Govt retaliation and blow-backs and Pakistan would be on fire. That was the intentional provocation which appears to have been staved off for the time-being. The same thing happened to the Algerian PM on 11th April, and a day later in Iraq`s parliament. I.e. direct attacks on the highest seats of Government.

The points of all the above are three. Firstly, Islam will not be suppressed. Secondly, it will not negotiate on a less than equal footing .... it will achieve an equal footing through whatever means before it will negotiate and; Thirdly Islam is a friend, not an enemy and does not pose a threat to people of any lifestyle or career ambition. It just requires commitment. If that`s not understood and its regarded as enemy, all bets are off.

Again, you know it`s not for your consumption. I`ll therefore also post this as an iLog.

Regards.

(P.S. Re one of your comments in #387, you may be a non-Muslim, (and you should remain so), but certainly no non-Believer. Being born Muslim does not make a Muslim. Neither does reciting a Kalima. Often it makes Munafiqs. What you talk about, you can`t be anything other than God`s humble and favoured servant, just as the believers are, only perhaps more so)

zeemax

In hindsight, I wasn`t as respectful of sattar sahib as I should have been. Whatever Ahmedism obviously is, Sattar sahib, without a doubt, WANTS to be a Muslim. Nor can any remotely doubt the total sincerity and great depth of his instinctive dislike of and hatred toward kufr - as you explained it. And, it`s no ordinary commitment and tenacity on his part to hold on so firmly to his burning religious passion and dedication despite the sometimes less than friendly reception he receives from both Muslims and non-Muslims.

So on your behalf and mine, I am glad to offer him a public apology. My only request would be that he please not go around calling you and other Muslims demons, and Islam, demonology, even though, we understand, he would like to put in its place something he calls `real Islam.`

That makes matters so much harder for others and for him. But hopefully, all this can be put behind peacefully.

---

As to the rest, the reactions of both Muslims and non-Muslims would have left me speech, had it not been expected. It does confirm the fear that creating a situation of respectful and honest Muslim-nonMuslim dialogue is going to take a lot of hard and difficult work. The root of the problem lies squarely in the unstated and unchallenged Gandhi-like fanaticism and bigotry of almost all non-Muslims. They remain steadfast in their refusal to systematically consider the possibility of any fully-developed and alternative mode of religiosity and being, significantly different from their own....:(

I will take a break soon to consider if a better, more effective and more efficient method of establishing a mutually beneficial dialogue can be found....

Kaalchakra,

You have tried in all sincerity, and now stand accused in their `katehra` (dock) with fingers pointed in amazement and personal abuse in rage as in ``How could you? Of all the people?`` by those your own; such that you were never subjected to in my 8 years of interaction on Chowk. You were always a respected sage. Now you`re a criminal.

That`s exactly what happened to each one in the early days who realized what Muhammad was saying, i.e. immediate ostracisation! And much worse, like dragging on burning hot sand and flogging while tied down ... even women .... also all by their own.

It was all to be expected and still is. Nothing new. That is why `Seerat` (character of Muhammad, and broadly his Companions) is as important as Qura`an itself in understanding Islam as Muhammad himself had asserted in his last sermon. He had asked people to follow both.

That is why Yvonne Ridley, after having been ostracised and punished, stands smiling in a crowd and says ``What extremists? I don`t know any!``.

People who quote Qura`anic verses, assign interpretations, and leave all else out are either ignorant or malicious. Precisely to remove these doubts, which he had foreseen, Muhammad had prescribed the above since he and his companions actually LIVED the Qura`an.

Islam emerged and spread in the light of history. Interpretations can be assigned to individual events or decisions, but in their totality their overall meaning cannot be denied.

I`m not a proselytizer, nor about to blow up anytime soon taking a few (innocents) with me (to the disappointment of many here), nor even about to depart on a radical mission in the path of Allah. I`m just as much or less of a career person as anyone else here. Islam has no issue with that. It just requires one in-the-least to be a `believer` which I fortunately am.

Just my two pennies worth on your post:

Islam too can work only when people who are to follow it, actually do follow it.

As long as there`re just a dozen Muslims left, the rest all killed, the `Alam` (Flag) will remain aloft and spread. Lord Nazir of Britain was saying the other day while chiding the House of Lords that how come we`re told there were 20,000 Taliban when we`ve killed 40,000?

There`s a lot of hoo-ha over that video of a 12 year old boy beheading a traitor. What no one noticed is that 12 year old boy is wearing a neatly-pressed brand-new freshly-tailored military uniform as are all around him. The point being made is not the beheading (that`s no big deal), but the depth of the movement. There were three generations in uniform (and not rag tag like before) in that video. That was significant. No one noticed that but everyone got stuck on indoctrination of children and stuff. The point being made was how many can you kill?

Particularly, when it was revealed to be so simple and straightforward a message that even the simplest person with the most basic comprehension and reasoning abilities can understand it.

I think Sattar said Qura`an is esoteric. That`s totally wrong. Qura`an lays out conclusions at the end of each verse so there`s no ambiguity in interpretation for the common person. However, if one wants to delve into the ``why`s``, that`s quite esoteric and anyone who wishes to do so may do so. But in the end, the only answer he`ll find is exactly as it was written in the first place in those simple verses ending in ``Allah is all Wise``, ``All Knowing`` and the such.

...who pull desperately ... to generate new meanings for every-day words, do so deliberately because they have no faith whatsoever in anything that they know Islam clearly says .... They are kafirs.

I wouldn`t go as far as that yet ... Kaal. At-least not for Sattar Saheb. There`re many Mushriks here (who hold other things dearer over Allah), Many Munafiqeen (who pretend but aren`t), but only a few Kafirs. I don`t regard Sattar as one of them. Again, not yet. The only definition of Kafir is `enemy of Allah` (and not all non-Muslims as many people think), and that is beyond redemption. Kufr is a dark state in which if a person falls, even the harshest punishment can only be euthanasia.

....it seems extremely doubtful that the God of Islam would have wanted this sort of dishonest Quranism to be the beginning and the end of Islam, or even central to it.

It isn`t central to it at all. That`s what Iqbal is saying here and the `believers` know it very well, almost all of whom have never even heard of Iqbal, but know Muhammad:



Although I do swear, I communicate directly with God.

I have absolutely no doubt that you do.

Regards.

#381 by zeemax on April 28, 2007 0:13am PT

My dear Zee, you need to stop your obsession with my meager and long-forgotten-by-the-rest contributions on this web-site – such as those dealing with caravans and associated objects (persons, places, and vegetables) lest you become ground to dust yourself.

Remind yourself that you are part of the caravan, only headed the wrong way from the rest of the travelers! :(

Hopefully, you will realize the folly while there is still time!

stuka, Beej

I am more with stuka on this. We really have to stop this obsession with ``problems with Islam.`` That is not going to work. It is self-defeating, as Sattar bhai of all-Islam-is-evil-except-whatever-I-have-made-up-to-be-``My-Islam`` fame will, sooner or later, find out.

Stuka, I understand what REAL Islam is. It is not rocket science. Nor was it ever meant to be.

---

Zeemax

You need to find a way (since only you can do it) to help our friends get out of this ``problem with Islam`` mindset. Like anything else, after all, Islam too can work only when people who are to follow it, actually do follow it. Particularly, when it was revealed to be so simple and straightforward a message that even the simplest person with the most basic comprehension and reasoning abilities can understand it.

As an important sidenote, zee, the inescapable conclusion is that people who make it all very complex - with interpretations upon interpretations piled a mile high - who pull desperately from Aramatic to AJAX to generate new meanings for every-day words, do so deliberately because they have no faith whatsoever in anything that they know Islam clearly says.

They are kafirs.

Only much worse (in my opinion, at least) since they are consciously using God-given talent to trick both God and man. Real Kafirs are, at worst, just ignorant or are simply not blessed with faith.

If I had faith, I would become a Muslim in an instant. These days Quranism, it seems, is all the rage. The idea seems to be that you can do, say, believe anything and everything you please so long as you can pull out of some odd fragment from the Quran and claim that that fragment supports your choice, words, and actions - none of which arose from the simple and straightforward Islam in the first place.

I am no Muslim, but it seems extremely doubtful that the God of Islam would have wanted this sort of dishonest Quranism to be the beginning and the end of Islam, or even central to it.

Khair, what do I know? Not being a Punjabi I can`t even claim for myself the title of a new Prophet. Although I do swear, I communicate directly with God.

(That last bit is supposed to be a stupid joke. Given how easy it is convincing people who know how to wear suites, I would hate to start receiving applications for followerships.)

#377 by kaalchakra

...obviously unislamic things claiming to be ``real`` Islam from time to time (that is a wonderful strength of Islam which zeemax will appreciate;..

You bet I do. They all carry the `Flag`. They may whimper, grumble, mumble, beg, plead, make faces, whine ... knowingly or unknowingly, whatever, but they`ll always carry that flag. They just can`t lay it down because they are nothing without it :)

Kaal:

``
So we must look for light everywhere else within the Islamic world, as far as this new and improved ``REAL Islam`` is concerned. [Let`s face it: Any thing that appeals as REAL Islam only to our friendly stuka and bj duo (other than to Sattar bhai) is unlikely to have much credibility in the eyes of the Divine God who worked so hard to create Islam. And if these two dear Hindu friends really are the only ones who can see this REAL islam, then sattar bhai should immediately revert to Hinduism (Where he would actually be welcome, being in a large company of other REAL Muslims like himself)]. ``

Please don`t flatter me. I have no claim to know the REAL Islam. My point is, neither do you. But you claim to recognize Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto as a supreme spokesperson of Islam after the prophet Mohammad since you take his assertion of Ahmedis being Non Muslims as fact.

Zeemax, notice why I am not abusing you. Because you are truly, genuinely an idiot. You are not even intelligent enough to be a bigot. You are just another stupid old man whose best days are behind him and who mouths off trying to live a life bigger than its own pathetic existence.

``(1) The “problem” that “Islam” is currently encountering is not a “public relations” problem to be fixed through supplies from the lipstick factory! There are real jihadis blowing up real people! The solution is that those jihadis be disarmed (singing praises of Sufism is easier but also pointless in solving the “problem”).``

No BJ, It is not Islam that is killing people, it is a subset of Muslims. And yes, let us all agree to kill that subset.


``(2) The people creating this “problem” are doing so from the INSIDE. There are real mullahs invoking, there are real families sending in their young as fodder and there are real political figures trying to capitalize.

For those truly concerned, perhaps it is worthwhile to deal with the “problem” inside. If one does that, what those located on the “outside” say – will cease to matter.``

Inside of what? The Koran? No, inside of Muslim societies. So yeah, bomb them.

``And if the objective is indeed to address the “problem”, perhaps a bit of “honesty” will work better. Perhaps start by examining WHY what you call “Zeemax type Islam” could become the sole version of Islam – a concern that you expressed (I doubt it personally, because I still put stock in people to put stock in common-sense).``

What honesty? I am being as hoonest as I can. If you want to sit here and bitch about Semitic religions versus eastern religions, sure, I can do that. But if you want to isolate Islam from Judaism and expect me to take Chutiyas like Krishna ABCD who have read three articles on Islam on the web to be taken seriously, you are very much mistaken.


``There is inherent dishonesty in equating Kaal’s leg-pulling of Sattar2 with Zeemax’s deliberate promotion of a radical agenda. ``

No there is not. Ultimately, anyone who wants to suppress freedom of thought is equally the enemy.

``[Kaal realizes that the true seductive power of Islam was not the Islam of the Sword but the Islam of the Sufis.]

Read up on Sufism and Islam, dickhead. Sufism has borrowed most of its philosophy from Hinduism, especially the Bhakti traditions in Hinduism. Sufi mysticism has nothing to do with Islam.

Do some reading before shooting off your mouth.``

I have done reading and don`t need to learn shit from you, you Brahmin motherfukker. Now shut the fukk up before I bitch slap your ass back to Banaras. Bhainchod.


[What I don`t understand is why Sattar even gives power to a Kaffir to define Islam to begin with. Was Mohammad the left testicle of Kaalchakra or the right one of Zeemax that they have the power to define Islam. One is a Kaffir and the other a Taqfeeri, both should be told to fukk off. ]

And you think that as a ass-licker dhimmi, you have the right to tell people to ``fukk off``? ``

Well, I am telling u to fukk off right now, aren`t I, u polluted product of a Devdasi and Brahmin.

``Ask your master HP how a dhimmi (especially a closet-dalit freak-job like yourself) should be treated by a Muslim like HP as prescribed in the koran. ``

I would rather teach your whore of a mother not to raise a son who talks back to her pimp.

It is hilarious to watch all these `real` and `tolerant` muslims, sufis, liberals, moderates, shamimists, and other assorted kanjars, pimps and bhands appear one by one on their `chobaras` and `kothas`, writhing in the colic pain of their helpless fury, tossing buckets of garbage on the all-conquering caravan passing below proceeding ever undeterred onwards to its ever renewed destinations.

In the end, for these it will be: `Karvan guzar gaya, ghubar dekhte rahe`.

(Or, as our great literati Beej. K. Singh had translated it: Gone is caravan - seek my eyes in vain; All I see is dust - dust full cloudy train)

Haha .. :)

#369 by stuka

[Kaal realizes that the true seductive power of Islam was not the Islam of the Sword but the Islam of the Sufis.]

Read up on Sufism and Islam, dickhead. Sufism has borrowed most of its philosophy from Hinduism, especially the Bhakti traditions in Hinduism. Sufi mysticism has nothing to do with Islam.

Do some reading before shooting off your mouth.


[What I don`t understand is why Sattar even gives power to a Kaffir to define Islam to begin with. Was Mohammad the left testicle of Kaalchakra or the right one of Zeemax that they have the power to define Islam. One is a Kaffir and the other a Taqfeeri, both should be told to fukk off. ]

And you think that as a ass-licker dhimmi, you have the right to tell people to ``fukk off``? Ask your master HP how a dhimmi (especially a closet-dalit freak-job like yourself) should be treated by a Muslim like HP as prescribed in the koran.

Just to look up one datapoint, I checked out one country where I thought conditions should be excellent and most favorable to this REAL and updated Word from our own Punjabi Messiah of Islam - Bangladesh.

No, the situation does NOT look good. :(

But may be, all this craziness and inability to see the TRUE Light has something to do with backwardness and hopelessness of (non-Punjabi) Indic tradition itself! Sattar bhai, we will now wait for some information from you about the Ahmedi goings on in other Muslim countries.

Huh? I thought I had deleted these two consecuative paragraphs:

``Now, in Pakistan we know the situation - - - - would naturally be born bigots, genetically wedded to the ``wrong`` Islam.`` And

``So we must look for light everywhere else - - - - (Where he would actually be welcome, being in a large company of other REAL Muslims like himself)].``

---

Darn, this may be divine punishment. A clear sign from On High :(

Stuka, bjkumar

I love you guys; really, and there is nothing either of you can say that I will take amiss. I KNOW stuka. So this is the end of my discussion with him on this subject.:)

Unless, of course, he wants to ask me any questions, which I will be pleased to answer to the best of my ability and time.

---

Jang, to be fair to sattar bhai, # 363 was inappropriately placed. It belonged to the i-log musings section (if anyone recalls that`s where I first recorded my doubts about sufism). But since the mistake has been made, I am stuck with it. So let`s continue, being fully ready to jettison these speculations entirely if they turn out to be unsupported by data that is important for our purposes as concerned outsiders.

The parallelism with Sufism to which you alluded is of course quite relevant, in as much as we are talking, even here, of Islam. And about obviously unislamic things claiming to be ``real`` Islam from time to time (that is a wonderful strength of Islam which zeemax will appreciate; not sure about our obviously good friends stuka and beej bahadur :)).

Yet, focusing too much on that parallelism may also be, I fear, misleading. In its nature, Ahmedism appears to be radically different from Sufism. It will appeal to very different kind of people. And it will require very different behaviors from its real followers like sattar bhai. Sufism had an egalitarian heart. Ahmedism appears to possess an elitist gene. Sufism spoke of love. Ahemdism seems to possess nothing but one underlying, tacit purpose - spreading hatred (sorry, again, sattar bhai. I hope you have stopped reading what I write :(, and group-level arguments are not at all a guide to judge individuals.). I can go on, but I hope you get the point.

But there is one immeasurably large difference here with sufism. Ahmedism, if it becomes anything nontrivial, appears to be a REAL and genuine threat to Islam. That`s why outside of Chowk, educated and concerned Muslims may not accept it as one of their own or celebrate it as a tremendous Islamic achievement (Muslims, as groups of human beings, are NOT the brainless idiots that many chowki analysts continuously insist we must believe them to be).

Now, in Pakistan we know the situation, more or less. But what happens there can not support a compelling argument. As Indians, we can easily assume, in agreement with sattar bhai, that (non-Punjabi) Pakistanis are all brainless idiots who have never heard of the (real?) Quran. Particularly since the days of Bhutto. And agree further with sattar bhai`s experience that those post-Bhutto non-Punjabi Pakistanis who might have heard of the Quran and who take Islam seriously would naturally be born bigots, genetically wedded to the ``wrong`` Islam.

So we must look for light everywhere else within the Islamic world, as far as this new and improved ``REAL Islam`` is concerned. [Let`s face it: Any thing that appeals as REAL Islam only to our friendly stuka and bj duo (other than to Sattar bhai) is unlikely to have much credibility in the eyes of the Divine God who worked so hard to create Islam. And if these two dear Hindu friends really are the only ones who can see this REAL islam, then sattar bhai should immediately revert to Hinduism (Where he would actually be welcome, being in a large company of other REAL Muslims like himself)].

Thus, the first thing that any serious outsiders must find out: Is Ahmedism (with its hot advertizing in hot suits and its even hotter arabic accents, combined with the lure of the fulfilment of core Islamic prophesies) at least treated ``officially`` as part of the great Islamic discourse within the larger Islamic world? Are the great Islamic societies of the world willing to let Ahmedis create significant institutions and build open and powerful presence within them?

If the answer is yes, then all my current reasoning about ahmedis will hold no water. It will be back to drawing board time, with sincere apologies to sattar bhai, and many questions to zeemax as to where this understanding of Islam (there is only one - no my islam or your islam) went wrong.

---

Sattar bhai, in trying to understand Ahmedism, do you know anything that might help us answer the question in #362?:

Do you have any information or reference on the numbers and religious activism of Ahmedis in Muslim countries other than Pakistan? Whichi is their next biggest base?

Thanks again.

#369 by stuka

My dear Stuka, with all due respect, that interact is way off-the-mark. Let me clarify something which perhaps I have only done a thousand times before:

(1) The “problem” that “Islam” is currently encountering is not a “public relations” problem to be fixed through supplies from the lipstick factory! There are real jihadis blowing up real people! The solution is that those jihadis be disarmed (singing praises of Sufism is easier but also pointless in solving the “problem”).

(2) The people creating this “problem” are doing so from the INSIDE. There are real mullahs invoking, there are real families sending in their young as fodder and there are real political figures trying to capitalize.

For those truly concerned, perhaps it is worthwhile to deal with the “problem” inside. If one does that, what those located on the “outside” say – will cease to matter.

And if the objective is indeed to address the “problem”, perhaps a bit of “honesty” will work better. Perhaps start by examining WHY what you call “Zeemax type Islam” could become the sole version of Islam – a concern that you expressed (I doubt it personally, because I still put stock in people to put stock in common-sense).

WHY WOULD IT?

And if you answered: “because the circle of time wants it to be that way”, I doubt anybody will buy that!

There is inherent dishonesty in equating Kaal’s leg-pulling of Sattar2 with Zeemax’s deliberate promotion of a radical agenda.

``. It would be hilarious if Bin Laden turns out to a closet Hindu, who managed to get USA to go after ummah in the land of the pure. The irony would instantly kill zeemax … ``

HAHAHA...I can just imagine Zeemax clutching his heart as he collapses...

stuka,

You know better what this hinduvta politics is all about. Dealing with kaal with the first time for me, and therefore a bit messy … kinda like sex.

With nukes aplenty and fanatics vying for power on both sides … is not a comforting thought. It would be hilarious if Bin Laden turns out to a closet Hindu, who managed to get USA to go after ummah in the land of the pure. The irony would instantly kill zeemax …

``I have been stunned by lack of coherence of our rambling philosopher (kaal miaN) and his unwarranted mudslinging.
``

Sattar: Actually, Kaal is very coherent. Its just that you are used to fighting self described fundamentalists within Islam and were not intellectually prepared for a flanking attack.

#various Sattar2,

Sattar2 sahib, I read some of your posts on this board. I think those are well intentioned and you should be praised for trying to bring about harmony to this alway-fighting web-site. I don’t think the circle of time should try to rile you up (with the apparent complicity of others)!

(If I see him, I promise to look for a stick to beat him up with.)

(Meanwhile, you should refuse to fall for his ruse and stop asking him to do physical acts which are anatomically impossible. Your clearly keen sense of humor - exhibited to Hamidm2, works much better instead.)

There is always a wide gap in the way any religion is “supposed to be” versus the way it is actually practiced (most often, in the laziest possible way – consistent with the First Law of human nature!) – a wider gap than most people are willing to admit – especially those who profess to be its most ardent admirers!


#Zee max
Earlier, I should not have called you VG, nor “Zee-kambakhat”! I apologize.
(Perhaps the term “Veggie” would be appropriate, though!)

stuka,

Those are astute observations. I have been stunned by lack of coherence of our rambling philosopher (kaal miaN) and his unwarranted mudslinging.

I have seen such behavior from urstruly, echo, zee … diehard, faithful Muslims; but perhaps never from a non-Muslim with little knowledge of Islam and no conceivable interest in it. So you may on to something for all I know …

Muhammad (pbuh) is now gone. But zeemax, Urstruly are around and claim to be acting on his behalf, while supporting suicide bombings. So pardon me if I refuse to get too close to them. But I did tell kaal exactly what you suggested. Although bj thinks it is physically impossible ... we`ll see ...

bjkumar,

I think HP’s assessment has at least some validity, in that Ahmadis are a fairly educated middle-class group, with access to economic opportunities. They are not ghettoized, as bulk of Pakistani population does not have issues with Ahmadis.

This assessment holds more true in larger cities, than it does in small villages. Village politics is more influenced by local mullahs, who are more likely to use Ahmadi issue as a ploy to exercise local influence (post #352 from harish gives a relevant example).

Only a small percentage of Ahmadis have suffered violent persecution; mostly in rural areas. Therein lies the dilemma - that of placing this persecution in its proper context.

A minor 0.001% chemical imbalance in a person’s body can give rise to severe headaches. Great majority of Palestinians are not suicide bombers, but suicide bombings there continue to influence people’s perceptions all over the world.

Hence, a small number, when placed in proper context, may seem larger than it did in its raw form.

In a way Ahmadi issue is not an issue at all; they are a small community and may disappear overnight without anyone noticing they are gone. This issue however involves Pakistan at large. It represents direction in which Pakistani politics is heading, with religious right looking to exercise more influence, and at times getting away with blatant gunda gardi. If this keeps up, Pakistan may risk drifting slowly into its own version of “dark ages”.

When seen from this viewpoint, Ahmadi persecution raises some disturbing issues involving greater Pakistan. And this is one of the key points lost in the Muslim/non-Muslim debate ... which again, serves the purpose of religious right.

Kaalchakra is the ultimate Hindu fanatic; his aim is to tear down anything soft about Islam (be it Sufism or the goodu ggody nature of Sattar) and make it reductive as a stark ``other`` to something like Hinduism. The more Zeemax type Islam becomes the mainstream (and ultimately sole) version of Islam, the more it becomes the polar opposite of Hinduism. Hence, the lines are drawn and opposition to the other becomes easier. Kaal realizes that the true seductive power of Islam was not the Islam of the Sword but the Islam of the Sufis. And once the Sufi seduced the non-believer in to the fold of Islam, it did not take long for the Wahabbi impact to seep in to the mindset. Whereas Islam of the Sword is easy to objectify and oppose, Sufi Islam is harder to concieve as the ``other``. Only thing is that leads to Zeemax taking Kaal`s adjectives as compliments and Sattar is left claiming to be Muslim and not realizing that his vision of Islam is anti-thetical to the bucket that Kaal has already put his Islam in.

What I don`t understand is why Sattar even gives power to a Kaffir to define Islam to begin with. Was Mohammad the left testicle of Kaalchakra or the right one of Zeemax that they have the power to define Islam. One is a Kaffir and the other a Taqfeeri, both should be told to fukk off.

#various Sattar

Dear Sattar2,

Some of the concluding acts that you are asking the circle of time to conduct are physical impossibilities!

#360 HP

HP my dear, that was a good response! Most unexpected from you, I would have added, except for the fleeting suspicion that you actually wrote this one while you were actually sober! :)

Is it fair to say that the situation of the Ahmedis in Pakistan is analogous to that of the Sikhs in India - with the obvious difference that the Sikhs in India are looking to be treated as a distinct group from the mainstream Hindus whereas the Ahmedis (perhaps out of fear of persecution) wish to be lumped with the mainstream (Sunnis)?

kal, if i remember, you had very low opinion of the sufis (the chistis and such). the idea was sufis in collusion with rulers, softened the gullible population (a complex argument which i wont get into now). sufis presented a religion (not really islam) which made sure that there is little or no revolt against the new rulers. it was a very controversial arguement then..looks like you are about to propose somethign on similar lines.

kaal,

You come across as a troll, looking for useless info, trying to salvage your personal stupidity.

So far you have criticized me (and Ahmadis) on Muslim/non-Muslim issue, taken cheap shots on “finality” issue, accused me of deliberate, misleading, misinterpretation, and more. You have failed to validate your criticism, and when pressed on an issue, you have simply moved on to another issue.

You are now claiming that Ahamdis are bigots, virulent, intolerant, controlling, etc. You also admit basing all this on your “hunch” and “feeling”.

Driving away your demons is not my problem. If you have something concrete, we can discuss it. Other than that, go fuck yourself.

HP (#360),

Thanks for injecting much needed sanity in this discussion.

Muslim/non-Muslim debate is mainly a ploy by religious right to show its political muscle … it has little to do with Islam. Fatwas of kuffr have been passed against (almost?) each sect by other sects. Difference in the case of Ahmadis is that all sects unanimously declared them non-Muslim. It seems prophethood was the main sticking point for ullema.

From what I know, the 1973 ``Ahmadi hearings``, where government leaders cross-questioned Ahmadi leadership on their beliefs, were kept secret by the government, which refused to release the transcripts. Lack of transparency here raises serious questions about backroom deal-cutting between government and ullema.

+++

Your comment that ``Islam claims Muhammad (pbuh) to be the last messenger`` is a bit ambiguous. One’s conclusion may depend upon the source of Islam he refers to.

Quran calls the Prophet (pbuh) “khatam-un-nabiyeen” (Seal of Prophets). This is the only Quranic reference cited against Ahmadis on prophethood issue. Ullema claim it can only mean “end of prophethood”, but Ahamdis maintain it means “most exalted prophet”.

In another place Quran uses “khatam” to imply “perfection”. Furthermore, I have seen Arabic references of “khatam-ul-muhaqaqeen” and “khatam-ul-auliya”, that is, “Seal of Muhaqaqeen” and “Seal of Auliya” … to suggest a person’s exalted status in a given field.

Ahadith where Prophet (pbuh) called himself the “last” prophet are often cited by ullema to support their view. They overlook ahadith where the Prophet (pbuh) called his mosque the “last” mosque. Question remains: what does “last” mean??? Apparently a lot is getting lost in translation; from Arabic to English, perhaps via Urdu.

Ahadith about ``reappearcne of Issa`` is another hot button. These ahadith, if taken as credible, may very well suggest appearance of another prophet among Muslims in later days. But I’ll digress …

+++

One can go in circles on this issue. And that’s part of the point.

It is grossly incorrect for ullema to claim that “khatam-un-nabiyeen” can only mean “last prophet”. They are in denial of mounting evidence; references, documents, ahadith, that clearly weaken their claim (if not more or less negate it). Their blind denial borders on intellectual dishonesty, to say the least … and that’s part of my issue with ullema and their stooges.

Jang, this is just a hunch at this time, but it is a strong one. To see if it will turn into a conviction will require a bit of learning and studying in detail the history, environment, objectives and community-level operations of Ahmedis. My hunch is (sorry sattar sahib, I am telling it as I feel it) that Ahmedism is a considerably more bigotted, intolerant, discord-generating, blindly superstitious, virulent, and controlling religion than either Islam or Hinduism. It might even lack the essential redeeming qualities of either (am less confident of that).

Hence, both Muslims and Hindus who are concerned about their own wellbeing and the well-being of their religions, might want to be quite wary of this cult-like ideology, which comes to them wearing suites and speaking in Arabic and French.

This is not directed at Sattar bhai. But if he does feel offended, he may without hesitation abuse me, my religion, or whatever else as much as he needs to. Still, to reiterate, at this time, this view is based on nothing more than semi-deductive guess work and hunches.

Sattar bhai,

Do you have any information or reference on the numbers and religious activism of Ahmedis in Muslim countries other than Pakistan? Whichi is their next biggest base?

Thanks in advance.

HP

It would be fascinating to learn some details on the immediate context of Ahmedis being declared non-Muslims in Pakistan. At first blush, it seems like a determined display of power by the `religious class` (the term used loosely, of course) in competition with other power groups - the secular modernists, feudals, nationalists, army, bureaucrats etc. Kind of establishing of turf. In the Pakistan of 70s, most of the groups competing against the religious class might have been somewhat weakened (on a relative basis), and the religious people saw their chance to (begin to) mark their political territory.

Or, was it something entirely different? And if that`s what it was, then was this the first real dare by the religious class, or did they make other major efforts before this? Also, if you know, did any important religious scholars and figures in Pakistan stand up for Ahmedis in this battle?

[When it comes to knowing and understanding Pakistan itself, you already seem up there, among the prophets, HP. :)]

#350 by harish_hyd
“HP Sahib, isn`t it a fact that Ahmadis are persecuted in Pakistan?”
Harish,

This is like saying Muslims are persecuted in India. When I get mad I can pull up some incidents to show that Muslims are persecuted but that would not be the whole story.

Ahmedis are part of the middle class in Punjab. They are NOT some insignificant powerless people. They are well connected and completely integrated in Punjabi society. Many families in Punjab have both ahmedi and non ahmedi members. They are mostly well educated and just a handful are uneducated. You persecute a group when you take economic opportunity away from them and ghettoized them. That is not the case with Ahmedis in Pakistan. Though I must say that they are constantly, harassed by bureaucracy about their religious beliefs and obviously that multiplies their anguish.

Personally, it does not matter to me whether Mohammed was the last prophet or not. I wish I had tried hard when I was younger and by now I could have been the last prophet.

Islam does have an ambiguity in its concept of the last Prophet. Islam claims Mohammed to be the last messenger of God but it does not preclude the possibility of resurrection of Christ. Since nobody knows when that would happen and the whole thing is based on some ‘signs’ that would foretell the rebirth of Christ. Those signs are so subjectively defined that many can interpret them in different conditions and claim to be Masih e Maood. There have been many in Islam who claimed that but eventually the orthodox Muslims were able to remove those sects from the mainstream Islam.

Pretty much all sects of Christians don’t consider Mormons to be Christians. However, they don’t have the state power to place that in the laws. Otoh, Mormons consider themselves to be better Christians. If you follow the debate here between Sattar and others, you will notice the same pattern.

My interest in that debate is minimal. However, I don’t agree with Kaal’s characterization of Sattar. I get a different read. Though, I would accept the difference of opinion between the two of us.

The Ahmedi issue was a major test for mullah to assert its political strength in Pakistan. That was the only issue that could have united the entire mullah categories and sects. Imho, ZA Bhutto committed a crime against the Pakistani society by conceding to mullah on that issue. Once he surrendered to the Mullah on the Ahmedi issue, the slippery slope of concessions to mullah has brought Pakistan to where it is in now.