Of Medical Students, Passports and Religous Tolerance

Since I have been temporarily released from my illegal detention by chowk staff, let me respond to that army apologist Leadenwinter. He writes "My dear masadi.. the US and Europe .. the so called bastions of democracy are in fact culturally, socially and politically seeped in feudalism to such an extent to make waderas from interior Sindh look like socialists... I know .. I deal with these people everyday. Wealth always remains crystallised, and this so called democracy you advocate only goes to revoke that pittance of welfare the Pakistani citizenry may receive by default in terms of stability of governance by the military. The civilian politicians just want to make money and are too illiterate or myopic to do anything else.. being the very feudals you seem to despise .. or do you .. ? more schizophrenia. "

In response to his support of military dictatorship and claims that Pakistan will not survive without the military, which he did using the confused rhetoric of the West's left as well as his illiteracy regarding feudalism/capitalism in the West, he responded with personal BS saying I watch too much tv and am taken over by the West's propaganda regarding democracy. To say the least, this does not constitutie as rebuttal. I have chosen his above quote to show how illterate this person is. Every post he makes shows us that he is trying to use the arguments of those all across the political spectrum (in a completely confused manner) to support dictatorship while totally disrespecting the people of Pakistan in a ultra right wing fashion.

He claims that Europe, the US etc are culturally, politically and socially feudal. Here he shows us that he doesn't know anything about those societies and their history. He offers as proof his "dealing" with those people- he says "I know .. I deal with these people everyday." this again is no proof, it is proof only for bigots who want to see things through the filters of their own stereotypes. He then offers an equally useless banal statement saying "wealth remains crystallized"! In an economy based on industrial production, jobs outside the home define existance unlike reliance on the estate of the feudals. Feudals never had any roots in the US, it was bourgeoisie through and through, with little opposition by the landed aristocracy, the way of the new rich, in Europe with a long feudal history there was struggle between the feudals and the bourgeoisie, the bourgeoisie sided with the public against the feudals, as a result of which history you see social democracies with the people incorporated to a much greater extent than the capitalist democracy of the US. Wealth doesn't just "crystallize", it gives greater opportunities to access power in socities based on it, using that "crystallized" wealth, the Americans have captured the Pakistan Army- the Pakistan Army does not provide relief or stabiltiy of rule, it destabalizes the state, ruins the institution and gets rid of governments for no damn reason, on the other hand whenever the people make claims for what it their right, they get rid of judges and declare emergencies, they start wars on behalf of the foreign powers that be brining all kinds of voilence and mayhem in the cities, it was same during the Zia era as has been during Musharraf's BS.

My age whatever it might be has no bearing on the message that has totally stumped you. Anyone with half a brain can see the "maturity" and "knowledge" that Leadenwinter the Pakistan Army apologist displays....Like all people having no clue of social evidence he bases his generalizations on his unscientific observations, having no clue of sampling or how fiction is converted to fact in a one institution dominated social structure, he blames the victims the people of nation and their representatives- however defective they might be due to what the Army has done to our state- rather than the devils of the Pakistan Army who have brought us to this level....

testing

The way mediaval middle east barbarism (Starting with stupid called Abraham( was he really there?)) developed, if the Quadianis treat another man than 7th century arab beduine as last Prophet, then they automatically disqualify to be called moslems...
Christians do not disagree with fundamental documents of Jews ( Old Testament...), but still they named their FAITH with different word....Ahmadiyas should follow it...
Otherwise they need to created Muhamediyas, Ahmediays.....


Majumder etc...
Why Indian philosophy is THE best?...every region you will find some prophets like Satya Sai, Basava, Chaitanya, Ramakrishna etc... Their followers live peacefully, without causing bloodshed....Look at Pakiastan....

Re: # 216
Vengat...
That is good for poor people of India and other 3rd world countries...Why you will produce huge number of animals, which you can not raise as human being?

Good:-) and you are right, in shaping short term conflicts or in overcoming them, ideas are much more powerful but not for long term conflicts. Here genes and the evolution of mind is much more powerful.

So even if all of us have wished to remain monkey, we couldn't have remained monkeys.

And so even if all of us turn into Kuranic muslims, we will still evolve into humans, because the other side that drives evolution follows much perfect laws that are much more amazing then world of religions or Islam.

And if someone claims, people don't live in different worlds, please show them those words and ask what those words represent - evil or good. My feeling is you would know the answer pretty quickly.

pinku, I disagree. There are genes, and there are ideas. Ideas are far more powerful, IMHO, than genes in shaping conflicts. And because of very powerful ideas, Muslims and non-Muslims do live in different worlds and follow differnt Gods.

Most people find that a shocking (even unethical, somehow) assertion, but it based on simply understanding how Muslims and non-Muslims think. As proof I simply resubmit all those extracts from the Quran back to you.

Do they represent a great evil against unbelievers? Do they represent mankind's great hope and blessing? The answer depends solely on whether one is a Muslim or not.

You have argued that because of genetic evolution one day Muslims will cease being Muslims. And many Muslims are fully convinced that because of spirtual evolution one day non-Muslims will cease being non-Muslims. I don't see how genetic evolution will make any difference, but if and when that happens, this discussion would be mute. There would be consensus.

Until then, there is no possibility of agreement. Not even the remotest possibility.

#306 Posted by Eklavya,

That is ok, see my post 307 against your earlier post, to know why i say you may be forcing yourself to think in one direction.

They are not "they", they are "us". Muslims, hindus and all divisions are our divisions and assuming that people are stamped on their back (or some other place of their choice) with religion is not good. Genes don't carry religion, but they are guranteed to carry the mechanism of evolution.


Religions are much more weaker compared to evolution of brain than you can realize, but for us mortals 1000 years are very long so we ignore the obvious. For evolution 1000 years is a small bit of time.

re #305 Posted by Eklavya,

Eklavya,

I don't know how you can understand what is "misleading" till you understand what is "leading" here. This is like assuming you are playing safe while all you are doing is not playing at all. It is basically in-action when you see situation is not all that good. Not that bad though, because not everyone will chose that way and things will still evolve. Muslims are not muslims, who knows what 100% muslims means. It isn't the fight between we and them, it is a fight between us. Doesn't matter what you or I do, this will settle only in one way and that is "hmmm during those old days people used to talk about God like this, like this and like this (say for different religions which nobody is attached to in future) and they did it for so many years".

you said:
[[But Islamic understanding is not like that, and what you consider evil, a Muslim would consider God's word, and mankind's blessing. ]]

Ha ha:-), so you mean to say their God is certainly different from God of rest of the world:-) and probably they see world itself differently. Generalizing muslims is a bit more difficult (though you can for a certain percentage) than guranting what Islam says. Definition of Islam relies on one book, so it is easy to say what it is, but an individual muslims is still much more than that, not just a robot following instructions in that book.



More importantly, you are hard pressed to exclude people who are already misled and for that you are even willing to say that those are different worlds with different sets of ideas. In such a case you will never get an idea what misleading means.

What is the correct lead, what is proper objective? You can not have an objective which is evil for half of the world and good for rest of it and still a proper objective. You are forced to think like this because you have already set boundries for your thinking.

Essentially, pinku (so this discussion does not stretch on) I would agree with everything you say if the discussion took place only among non-Muslims. You can't include a Muslim in the discussion and expect to be able to arrive at shared judgements (except through one or both parties deceiving each other, in some form).

GTG. Later, pinku.

laddu, the reverse taqiyya you speak of is quite possible, and may be widespread in the Muslim world, where many many kafirs probably live safely, pretending to be sufis.

But that's not the case for most sufis, even here on chowk, among such sufis as ts bhai, salim bro, naqsh sahib, and echo dada (who all differ even among themselves).

--------------

pinku, my judgement is immaterial. It is like yours, based on our own limited, human, understanding. With that limited, human, understanding, you(or I, or anyone who relies on his or her own, limited, understanding) may find all that text very evil.

But Islamic understanding is not like that, and what you consider evil, a Muslim would consider God's word, and mankind's blessing.

No point fighting over that difference. Let's just accept it, and live in knowledge of that difference. So long as we are not led to believe (sufi style) all that text means anything other than what it clearly says, everyone (Muslims and non-Muslims) should be ok.

IMHO, it is the misleading part that is evil from *both* (radically different) perspectives - yours and Islamic. My argument has been that that effort to mislead is always evil, although someones we tend to 'protect' and justify efforts to mislead others when these efforts help propagate whatever we believe in.

re #300 Posted by Eklavya ,

Eklavya,

You have a grand illusion it seems. The idea of good and bad (deception/evil) is much older than the idea of muslims and non-muslims.

Forget about muslims if you are too fond of Islam and think how an intelligent person who doesn't know what muslim/Islam means say before 1 AD will feel about such verses. It is kind of self deception when you try to color things to make your self ignore reason.

When we try to understand what some thing is or when we want to give judgement on something, the first thing we will do is to get an un-biased person and if you so heavily depend on muslim or non-muslim division to think about something, you can hardly ever make a correct judgement, for you all is ok and not ok at the same time depending on the subject and not on the object.

Don't assume that reasoning or rationality is so surreal, it is not perfect but to make it look like something random is to fool your self, you wouldn't need a brain in that case.

Your way of confusing things like this and giving them arbitrary acceptance is self deception at least or deception if you mean to deceive others.

you wrote:
[[To return to the excerpts you provided, you can embrace those words as Godly or you can reject them as devilish, depending upon the light (or darkness) within you.]]

This itself is a deception, you compared rejection with darkness in brackets. Was it intentional??


How do you define deceit or deception?

What is God's point of view??? Who told you about it???


Seems you think good and bad are arbitrary???
Well that is not that case. Good and bad are not arbitrary and there is no God's point of view except this world itself. Humanity's ultimate objective can't allow anger against anyone and the God/prophet of these verses shows anger against those who are not abiding him.

But before we can talk further first tell me what is your idea of God?? What is your idea of objective of the whole humanity?

I am again posting one of the verses so that you see the content, which you ignore very easily.

002.014
Y: When they meet those who believe, they say: "We believe;" but when they are alone with their evil ones, they say: "We are really with you: We (were) only jesting."
P: And when they fall in with those who believe, they say: We believe; but when they go apart to their devils they declare: Lo! we are with you; verily we did but mock.
S: And when they meet those who believe, they say: We believe; and when they are alone with their Shaitans, they say: Surely we are with you, we were only mocking.

The existence of Type 1 Kafir-Sufis clearly does not the requirement of "Loving Prophet" - it jettisons Prophet and talks mainly about "Loving Allah".
Prophet is relegated to just a post man who was useful for the delivery of message and once the message is delivered his utility ends!!!
Of course, You do not "Love Postman". Do you?

There are two types of Sufis-

1. The clearly Kafir-Sufis, most of the time protected and surrounded by kafirs, who do not care about Sunnat even publically.

2. The muslim sounding Munafique-Sufis, most of the time surrounded by momeens, who sometimes have to make pronouncements about Sunnat in a strategy called reverse-taquiyya. Nonetheless, Sunnis still see through this reverse-taquiyya and rightly call them mushriques.

India now houses Sufis of type 1 who do not have to worry about the muslims in order to be on the path of Fanaa. Mullahs have already declared under Fatwa that muslims should not go to the mazars of these sufis and pray without any effect because it does not effect the kafir bhaktas who come to the mazar and keep the sufi shrine well maintained.

Type 2 Sufis are under constant threat by mullah Islam and barely thrive independently. They constantly look towards the Indian-Sufis and realize that they are under stranglehold of Sunni Mullahs in Pakistan.

Re: # 298

"a Muslim is proud to be a slave of Allah, (and in case of sufis, a slave of Prophet Muhammad), .."

This is incorrect.

For a Sunni Mullah , his Hadith remain the point of difference between Type 1 and himself .
For a Sunni Mullah even Allah is a slave of Mohammad and Mohammad is almost (if not superior) to Allah. But for Type 1 Sufi, Mohammad is just a postman and Allah and his one-ness is the only message that is important.

Remember, even Muhammad's young bride Aisha once said sarcastically on Muhammad's revelations "I feel that your Lord hastens in fulfilling your wishes and desires"!!

Type 1 just has almost no use for Mohammad. Type 1 also uses his own methods of praying and worship (Sadhana) that are not to be found in Sunnah!!

pinku, that's the old problem of totally different mindsets of Muslims and non-Muslims. Non-Muslims would obviously find all that very hateful toward unbelievers but then that's why they are non-Muslims.

But deceipt and deception are wrong from both humanistic and God's points of view. Those who apply deceipt against Muslims (mirzais) and those who apply it against non-Muslims (sufis) are wrong.

To return to the excerpts you provided, you can embrace those words as Godly or you can reject them as devilish, depending upon the light (or darkness) within you. That's your choice. But to lead you into all that through deception, THAT's real evil. No God or man would want that.