Religiosity, National Ethos and Governance

hamidm #53 Obviously Musharraf does not agree with you about everything being fine - otherwise why would he put thousands of people in jail which has forced even Bush to speak out against him? Perhaps Musharraf will take your advice and not interfere with the demonstration called for this Friday by Benazir, but I would not bet my chowk nic on that. Stay tuned for that..

PS: You are beginning to sound like Baghdad Bob a bit now: "What opposition? I dont see any opposition!! People are happy!! See: They are lining up for gulaab jaman at the Happy Halwai shop in Lahore!! Why, when I mentioned "crisis" on the phone today, my sis in Pakistan thought I was talking about the wedding invitation cards misspelling the groom's name!!"

Re: # 58

shankar mian,

...... would you hire a shrink who is nice, honest and reasonably intelligent but doesn't know crap about psychiatary ?........

....... politics, like prostitution and shrinkery, is profession and you have to know the art to be successful .... we have had people like imran khan before; asghar khan is a prime example - a hijra from his home town got more votes than him ..... imran khan should have joined an established party and learned the trade instead of striking out on his own .... like an independent streetwalker he is going to get beaten up by the pimps and the other girls ....... it is a tough business .... i feel sorry for the poor guy and send him all my tax-deductible dollars, but i'd vote for masadi or romair before i vote for him ....... the man is a loose cannon and a fool ...

Hey Zyrix and Zeemaxes of this crazy country of Pakistan,

Please tell me would you allow an idolator like me who loves his "Buta-Paraste" become the Khalifa of you momeen land???.......

Re: # 9 Posted by hamidm2 on November 7, 2007 4:30:48 am

Hamidm2,

[.... what the muslims really need to do is to get their heads out of their posteriors,...]

Do you mean the posteriors of the person in front of them? Being a communal loving society this is what is actually happening.

hamid mian,

why is imran khan never even considered an alternative?
he has no corruption charges..seems patriotic..reasonably intelligent..
he is the only Paki who defeated India(hey that itself should be reason enough to make him pm)
compared to the alternatives you have, tell me, who is better?!

Re: # 56

mateen mian,

........ a religious bigot by any name is just as foul ..... anyone who proposes the implementation of barbaric seventh century laws and the establishment of a government based on the model of the abominable four is a jihadi ........ the disguise of scholarship does not hide the suicide belt .....

RE: Naqshbandi, hamidm2: Very sincere and reasonable suggestion - please read and assimilate the total write-up. Your own self-contradiction is apparent when you disdainfully state "...didn't read the whole article but it was rambling and seemingly self-contradictory in parts" Touche!
However, you do have it right in that measures suggested are for a structure that is based on "traditional Islamic Fiqh principles" - to a point. Please read my response at no. 8. I am a 'Sunni' by birth, but a total Muslim in practice, thought and intent/action. I don't agree with your implied assertion that the Sunni Orthodoxy is the true spirit or foundation of Islamic Jurisprudence or life-style [this term IS very contextually valid to what may be termed as 'ways of a Mussalman'] There are profound lessons to be picked up from Shia and Sufi religious practices and in their application of doctrines given in the Holy Qura'an.
A quick reading/video study of Akbar S. Ahmed's, "The Living Islam"; Syed Ameer Ali's 'The Spirit of Islam'; Fatima Mernissi's 'Islam and Democracy'; and the renditions of the Quran mentioned in my Post at No.8, would probably cast better light on what is being stated.
There can be no debate or discussions on the meanderings of tahmed and confusion on 'secularism', 'liberalism' etc etc: the Revelations of the Holy Qura'an [as also the Torah, Ingeel, Talmud, Gospel] are very lucid insofar as having a secular outlook is concerned. It is the "moulvis" [not "maulanas"] who have disgraced and distorted the very essence of Islamic Philosophy/Traditions by their fulminations and belligerance, making a simple 'deeni' message into a 'na-deeniat' masa'ael. With deference to Zyxius, I beg to differ on the 'Taliban' and 'Deobandi' ways.

Re: # 53

tahmed,

.... did you see the ppp 'demonstration' in islamabad today? ...... there are more people lined up to buy mithai at qasr-i-shireen on eid!

....... i think the people of pakistan are in no mood to take to the streets simply they don't have any faith in the same old tired faces - fazloo, bb, qazi, ns ...... and that clown, imran khan - what the hell is he up to ! ......... hiding under the bed in his cousin's house and issuing video tapes as if he was osama in his cave! .... what a joker!

i didn't read the whole article but it was rambling and seemingly self-contradictory in parts...

anyway i agree largely with Zyxius. The older I get and the more I read about our history the more certain I am that Muslims will remain in this weak and pathetic state where our blood is cheap until we return to Traditional Islam--the orthodoxy which existed in the Sunni world [at a coexistence with the Shia world before others start talking of sectarianism] until the 19th/ 20th century and the calamity which was the end of the Caliphate by that heretic Ataturk.

We need to return to the Quran and Sunnah as historically represented for over 1000 years by the Four School of Sunni Orthodoxy which coexisted without any problems. Traditional Islamic fiqh principles are so brilliant that they allow qualified legal islamic scholars to adduce rulings for any modern development now or in the future till Qayamat.

I do think though that the mainstream Muslim majority [both Sunni and Shia] are also largely to blame for the rise of the extremist lunatic fringe who disavow the classical consensus for their own deranged interpretations which lead to the atrocities we see today. Our fault is that we depoliticised Islam completely--understandable perhaps given the traumas of colonisation and loss of caliphate and Muslim sultanates everywhere--and turned Islam into a purely devotional faith. Whereas traditionally classical Islam balanced the temporal and the spiritual: the Sufis also advised the sultans and took part in jihad! By leaving the political arena to the extremist ghair muqallids we have shot ourselves in the foot. The solution is for the silent mainstream Muslim traditionalists of the 4 Schools and the Sufi tariqahs to get politically involved so that we can have insha Allah--when it is His Will--a union of strong, Islamic, states governed by the Sacred Law with an Amir at its head till Allah sends the Mahdi alayhisalam.

When a major political party (PPP) gets off the fence and joins the thin, brave ranks of the lawyers (as per demonstrations today), when the army itself has rumblings of discontent with Musharraf's insane destruction of Pakistani institutions...does this mean Musharraf's goose is perhaps cooked?

See article:

1. by Benazir in NYT today:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/07/opinion/07bhutto.html?ref=opinion



2. on the army discontent with Musharraf:

http://www.boston.com/news/world/asia/articles/2007/11/07/in_pakis tan_the_army_is_key/

#49 Posted by masadi,

I disagree completely. One to two million people don't die in war for someone else's cause. They die for their own cause.

In the Afghan Jihad case, they fought and died for their independence from a foreign invader, motivated by Allah's message in the Qura'an. It is as simple as that. And they continue to do so when the foreign invader is the same in whose cause, according to you, they were fighting for in the first place.

Sorry Masadi, but your logic is skewed.

Zyxius writes " The US will probably go bankrupt fighting these ridiculous wars "

That's where you are dead wrong, wars are very beneficial for the US political economy, it is very profitable maintaining standing armies and bases and undertaking reconstruction, post WW2 that has been the strategy of the US power elite, they're no fools...

It is clear that everyone can argue till the cows come home, and it will make no difference since many people will simply remain convinced of their existing beliefs. The things that everyone should take away, in my opinion, are these:

1. Pakistan is a Muslim country and will remain so despite the frothings of the "civil society" secularists. Islam shouldn't be forced on anyone, but neither should the secularist thump their beliefs in the self righteous manner that they do and try to force them upon others. If they do, they should expect what they get just like those who push their Islamic beliefs these days who are termed extremists and usually exterminated with gunships. Secularists can be fanatics and extremists too! The last century should prove that secularists/liberals have killed probably more than any religious group.

2. Terms such as "maulvi" only lump people together, and if we claim to be educated we should be above that sort of thing and be specific about whom we are talking about rather than lumping all people together. If you don't like Islam and don't want anything to do with it, fine...but be respectful as you would expect respect for yourself and your beliefs.

3. Stop finding divisions amongst ourselves and realize that we are being threatened from outside. The Americans are not your friends....they only have "interests". Their war on terror has started with Afghanistan, went to Iraq, the plan for Iran is now in full swing, and does it take a genius to figure out that Pakistan could be under threat? No matter what you believe in, secularism, religion, communism, or any other ism, if you are a Pakistani you should stop the divisions and look at the common grounds that exist and build on them. If you can't find common ground with others that you disagree with, you aren't as civilized or educated as you think you are....even if you are one of the "enlightened" secularists.

4. Ask yourself the root causes of our issues rather than just jump to the easy name calling and assigning blame to the "mullahs". Could it be that someone could have done something to hurt these people of SWAT and caused them to rise up? The US will probably go bankrupt fighting these ridiculous wars and Pakistan is barely even a shadow of the US...we simply cannot afford to ignore reality and squash it with brute violence followed by a well oiled propaganda machine [Fox News].

5. Things will never change in Pakistan unless people find COMMON GROUND!!

Zeemax writes :"And if the numbers you quote are correct (they lost around 1 to 2 million), I will need a lot of convincing to know that they died for nothing. "

They died for America's cause, and when you fight on behalf of the devil you end up in hell, that is what Afghanistan is right now and what it became after that fight...

#43 Posted by masadi

You are on the wrong side Zee, you are not on the side of Islam

If Islam is nothing but Qura'an, and if it means what it says, that's my side. I don't bother much with exotic interpretations. And if the numbers you quote are correct (they lost around 1 to 2 million), I will need a lot of convincing to know that they died for nothing.

#40 Posted by laddu,

Actually that's true. Where did you learn that?