Preventing More Lal Masjids

#906 Posted by zeemax:

Sometime back you said:

"But, to answer your question, after having wracked my mind,"

I take it from this statement that you are THINKING when you say:

"But what if resolution through argument and practical logic is not possible?

Then, the better side would have won. Simple."

If so, then you are a flaming LIBERAL who is extremely upset by this onslaught against Muslims.



So what you are saying is that after THINKING you come to the conclusion that

#907 Posted by GT,

I don't know what event you're referring to of 1857. But I don't need to go back 150 years to find any answer. Islam has had a lot of ups and downs, and perhaps the most varied experience of the world than any other. There's a resurgence going on right now and it is back to the basics. I have said this many times before. Only the basics are the real power of Islam, which is why people are turning to them.

I don't thing masadi is a Muslim BTW. I have come to believe he's waiting for some Mehdi like our friend 'Number' here.

Zee:

Get a grip on yourself.

"They lay down their lives for friends unthinkingly without distinction of caste, creed or colour ... " that is Islam.

Is this what they did in 1857? Is this Islam? Laying down your life for a friend (who knows what the friend is upto) is not Islam. It is tribalism. It is these kinds of things that you say which get the goat of people like masadi.

#904 Posted by GT,

But what if resolution through argument and practical logic is not possible?

Then, the better side would have won. Simple.

...contd...#903,

... you would have seen Fawzia Afzal Khan's article of contempt, and also perhaps noticed the affection those Muslim girls showered on her as per her account. They would have died for her too even though there was nothing common between them.

That is Islam.

#902 Posted by zeemax:

Zee:

We are already talking :)

"They left their prophet unburied and thought resolving dissent by argument and practical logic was more important."

This is a great first step. But what if resolution through arguement and practical logic is not possible?

#901 Posted by GT,

Yes it's clearer now. But I'm still afraid you do not fully grasp Islam ...

When they ""They lay down their lives for friends unthinkingly without distinction of caste, creed or colour ... ", that is Islam. It is not 'oons'.

No 'oon' will lay down their life for their teachers and friends like the Hafsa girls did ... it is right in front of you. That is a pure Islamic deed. You don't run away to save your life and leave your colleagues behind. If you die, you die. That's it. No less no more.

(P.S. Don't get too hung up on Animal Farm. Islam transcends that by far)

#899 Posted by GT,

Zee,Propose a set of rules for governance where incidents like Lal Masjid do not occur in Pakistan again. Make sure that the rules hold for Lal Mandir too.

GT, I'm accused of living in the 7th century, being regressive, and by masadi of even being an idolator, and plenty of other stuff.

But, to answer your question, after having wracked my mind, I cannot come up with a better set of rules than when Muhammad's body was lying unburied, and the Quraish had gathered in the Masjid-e-Nabvi awaiting the next Caliph's appointment, and word reached that the Ansaar were preparing to name their own Caliph ... Abu Bakr, Umar and Abu Ubaida had rushed to the Ansaar's meeting place leaving everything aside. If they hadn't done that, Islam would be dead at Muhammad's death. There would have been civil war.

It was much within the power of Muhajireen to crush Ansaar's rebellion by force, but they didn't do that. They left their prophet unburied and thought resolving dissent by argument and practical logic was more important.

Can there be a better assignment of priorities than that?

"They lay down their lives for friends unthinkingly without distinction of caste, creed or colour ... "

That makes them 'oons' (remember, for me 'oons' are good people who do not discriminate).

"The ones with power who speak the language of the 'oons' but who run after the control of a powerful state are the ones you and echo are talking about."

These are the bad guys ... like Indira Gandhi, Stalin, Bhutto etc. Their language is full of words like 'secularism', 'nationalism, 'internationalism', 'roti-kapda-makan' etc. See what they do .... they advocate a strong state (a mai-baap state complete with socio-economic hegemony) ... and then they take control over the state. Have you read 'Animal Farm' ... I am talking about the pigs .... they are not 'oons' .... Yes, oscar the horse is an 'oon'. Am I a bit clearer now?

#897 Posted by GT,

I may have been a bit hasty on this, but your post wasn't clear. Do forgive if I erred.

Zee,

Propose a set of rules for governance where incidents like Lal Masjid do not occur in Pakistan again. Make sure that the rules hold for Lal Mandir too. In that context, let us see how much power the state should have? Then let us see how much of a disagreement we have here in chowk.

#897 Posted by GT,

GT, I don't know what you mean by "(as you yourself have pointed out in the case of Pathans)The ones with power who speak the language of the 'oons' but who run after the control of a powerful state are the ones you and echo are talking about.
.

Can you pls clarify? Where did I say that they're running after power?

Just to further elaborate, Islam is 'part' of tribal Pathans deep inside, not just a religion like we discuss all the time ... it is part of their very being.

And they don't give a damn about power. The ONLY thing important to them is honour.

Now can I please have my answer?

#895 Posted by zeemax

"You don't hold them in contempt, like most 'oons' do for anyone remotely resembling a 'Mulla', or voicing Allah or Islam."

Zee, I disagree. Most 'oons' do not hold other people in contempt. They are simply not heard. The common people are mostly 'oons' (as you yourself have pointed out in the case of Pathans). The ones with power who speak the language of the 'oons' but who run after the control of a powerful state are the ones you and echo are talking about.

Do you know the greatest 'oon' in our mythology? His name is Arjun, the one who protested the war in the Mahabharata. His ideology does not rule, Krisna's dogmatic ideology of 'duty' rules us even today. But Arjun's wimpy protest has left us with a language of protest: we do still ask 'duty towards whom'? It is a still a start for a protest movement ... at least in our sub-continent.

#893 Posted by zeemax
cont....

The IAF bombings of Mizoram, Nagaland, Golden Temple, Punjab, Assam, Delhi Riots, Gujrat, Kashmir ... whenever the Indian state has killed in these regions it has received the subtle support of the classes that matter in the rest of the country. We keep on denying till we reach the absurd. The Pakistanis should not let this happen in their country. There are examples of conflict resolutions in India that Pakistanis can learn from too .... Gorkhaland comes to mind straight away. Hopefully by learning, Pakistanis can leapfrog India in building a better (i.e. weaker) state.

#894 Posted by GT,

Look ... GT, you 'negotiate' with your own people. You don't hold them in contempt, like most 'oons' do for anyone remotely resembling a 'Mulla', or voicing Allah or Islam. You talk to them, and resolve issues. They are citizens of Pakistan too.

That is what the liberals of Pakistan are guilty of ... i.e. holding Islam in contempt. That is why we're seeing what we're seeing today.

I have lived in dorms with Wazirs and Mehsuds. I know how loyal they are. And I equally know, how fierce.

They lay down their lives for friends unthinkingly without distinction of caste, creed or colour ... but they don't leave their enemies alive ... no matter what. That's their way. Take my word for it. It is a tragedy of immense proportion that we have turned them against us.

#893 Posted by zeemax

"You don't lay siege and kill your own women and children like that. You fight powerful enemies, not your own unarmed civilians."

Who gave the dictator this power? Will Pakistanis/Indians ensure that their respective states never have such unchecked powers in the future? How can we do so? Can 'oons' and 'fundoos' come together in answering this question? Can Pakistanis and Indians come together in answering this question? .... I must be dreaming ... need some tea.