Indians and Pakistanis Must Start Anew

we should look towards cooperation with south-asian countries like nepal, srilanka and bangladesh. there`s no point in wasting time over pakistan. ( i thought it was in the central asia anyway ).

PS: udaykumar ? you are not related to prafful bidwai are you ?

Asif Naqshbandi!

I think, Ata-Turk might have read a post of yours before writing his comments.

Asif Naqshbandi!

You answer is ``Uzr Gunaah Badtar as Gunaah``

Did you forget many Hadith regarding dogs``

If dog is Najis, how can you compare it with a human being.

Remember the Hadith and it is especially for you.

That previous nations have been destroyed because they kept their prophets and saints in the esteem which they did not had.

Or are you too much influenced by Qais to negate all the Hadith to substantiate your point.

Sheesh Naag bhai,

Your post made me smile :-)

I have not denied that Huzoor Pur-Noor sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam are a human being and the most perfect ``abd`` of Allahu Ta`ala. But they are not like other beings, like Imam Busiri has said a ruby is a stone but not like other stones. Huzoor are Habib Allah, Rasool Allah, noor, they received Wahy, etc .etc. there is no way we can compare an ordinary person to the Best of Creation sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam, the best of men. Remember the hadith ``which one of you is like me?!``

BUT my friend the point about the dogs of Madina being better than the Qaid--which is what I wrote--was not meant to denigrate Qaid e Azam (I respect him as the founder of Pakistan) but rather show the unimaginably high status of Our Master Sayyidina wa Mawlana Rasool Allah sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam! ONly Allah knows the true status of His Beloved! As Our Master said,`` O Abu Bakr! No one knows my true self except My Lord!`` (sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam!) and Allah confirms this in the Qur`an:

TRuly, (O My Beloved Prophet!) thou art of a magnificent character!

It is about ishq you see. Remember the story about when Qays kissed the paws of Layla`s dog? His friends said you are truly mad (majnoon) for kissing a dog! He said but it is the dog of my beloved and therefore beloved to me as well! So, my point was that the dogs of madina are nothing in themselves--it was not meant as a literal statement bhai--BUT because of the NISBAT (link) with Huzoor sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam`s city--they are the dogs of the Beloved Prophet`s city!--they are elevated! Do you understand? Any thing linked to the beloved is beloved itself!

As the great Indian scholar and Sufi ala hazrat Imam Ahmad Raza Khan Barelvi alayhirahmat has said,

Raza kissi sag-e-Taiyyiba kay paon bhi choomay?

Tum aur aah! ke itna dimaagh lay kay chalay!

and also,

Farsh waalay teri shaukat ka `uloo kya jaanein?

Khusrava! Arsh pe uRtaa hai pharaira tera!

Another two couplets of Ala Hazrat to sign off:

Tujh se dar, dar se sag aur sag se hai mujh ko nisbat

Meri gardan mein bhi hai door ka Dawra tera!

Is nishaani kay jo sag hain nahin maare jaatay

khashr tak mere gallay mein rahe paTTa tera!

ameen!

[sag = dog in Farsi]

ghulaam az ghulaamaan-e-Rasool,

Abd al Mustafa

Asif

p.s. to YLH -- who cares if Qaid e Azam was against the Caliphate? Since when has he been a religious authority?! He founded Pakistan and may Allah bless him for that but that is all.

And if it wasn`t for the Naqshbandis half of the Muslims of Indo-Pak would be worshipping the Sun and other kufr practices introduced by Akbar in his court as part of the Deen-i-Ilaahi! It was Hazrat Mujaddid Alf al Thani quds sirruhu and his descendants who purified Islam and were responsible for the failure of the Deen e Ilaahi.

Apart from the Messenger of Allah sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam no one else is perfect or infallible amongst the Creation and so you should not almost worship Ataturk. He called Our Beloved Prophet ``that illiterate bedouin`` (astaghfirullah ! May Allah forgive me for writing such words even) and other things of a derogatory nature and for this I hate him and the ulama have declared him a zindeeq and a kaafir.

I will find the exact quotes by Ataturk and then you will see his true nature insha Allah.

Sheesh Naag bhai,

Your post made me smile :-)

I have not denied that Huzoor Pur-Noor sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam are a human being and the most perfect ``abd`` of Allahu Ta`ala. But they are not like other beings, like Imam Busiri has said a ruby is a stone but not like other stones. Huzoor are Habib Allah, Rasool Allah, noor, they received Wahy, etc .etc. there is no way we can compare an ordinary person to the Best of Creation sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam, the best of men. Remember the hadith ``which one you is like me?!``

BUT my friend the point about the dogs of Madina being better than the Qaid--which is what I wrote--was not meant to denigrate Qaid e Azam (I respect him as the founder of Pakistan) but rather show the unimaginably high status of Our Master Sayyidina wa Mawlana Rasool Allah sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam! ONly Allah knows the true status of His Beloved! As Our Master said,`` O Abu Bakr! No one knows my true self except My Lord!`` (sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam!) and Allah confirms this in the Qur`an:

TRuly, (O My Beloved Prophet!) thou art of a magnificent character!

It is about ishq you see. Remember the story about when Qays kissed the paws of Layla`s dog? His friends said you are truly mad (majnoon) for kissing a dog! He said but it is the dog of my beloved and therefore beloved to me as well! So, my point was that the dogs of madina are nothing in themselves--it was not meant as a literal statement bhai--BUT because of the NISBAT (link) with Huzoor sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam`s city--they are the dogs of the Beloved Prophet`s city!--they are elevated! Do you understand? Any thing linked to the beloved is beloved itself!

As the great Indian scholar and Sufi ala hazrat Imam Ahmad Raza Khan Barelvi alayhirahmat has said,

Raza kissi sag-e-Taiyyiba kay paon bhi choomay?

Tum aur aah! ke itna dimaagh lay kay chalay!

and also,

Farsh waalay teri shaukat ka `uloo kya jaanein?

Khusrava! Arsh pe uRtaa hai pharaira tera!

Another two couplets of Ala Hazrat to sign off:

Tujh se dar, dar se sag aur sag se hai mujh ko nisbat

Meri gardan mein bhi hai door ka Dawra tera!

Is nishaani kay jo sag hain nahin maare jaatay

khashr tak mere gallay mein rahe paTTa tera!

ameen!

[sag = dog in Farsi]

ghulaam az ghulaamaan-e-Rasool,

Abd al Mustafa

Asif

p.s. to YLH -- who cares if Qaid e Azam was against the Caliphate? Since when has he been a religious authority?! He founded Pakistan and may Allah bless him for that but that is all.

And if it wasn`t for the Naqshbandis half of the Muslims of Indo-Pak would be worshipping the Sun and other kufr practices introduced by Akbar in his court as part of the Deen-i-Ilaahi! It was Hazrat Mujaddid Alf al Thani quds sirruhu and his descendants who purified Islam and were responsible for the failure of the Deen e Ilaahi.

Apart from the Messenger of Allah sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam no one else is perfect or infallible amongst the Creation and so you should not almost worship Ataturk. He called Our Beloved Prophet ``that illiterate bedouin`` (astaghfirullah ! May Allah forgive me for writing such words even) and other things of a derogatory nature and for this I hate him and the ulama have declared him a zindeeq and a kaafir.

#200

Naqshbandi Bhaii: O` méria sohnia mahia! I am a `born` Muslim. Muslim of sorts, as it were. But I listen and weave my own taar with the Almighty.

Now, my parents used to lay great emphasis on the following: La Illaha il Allah ho Mohammad, //abda hu//, wa Rasul ... . [My spellings of Arabic are atrocious, I know, but I am not going to commit suicide over it. So, grin and bear.]

The way my parents recited the Kalama, they emphasized the Prophet was His //banda// [human being like you and I] first and ``then``, [implied] His Rasul. This last description setting him apart from all other human beings. So far so good.

Now where did you bring in the dogs of Medina being better than... etc.

Wouldn`t it be Kufr to declare a dog better than His Ashraf`ul`makh`luqat? Now you don`t want to throw a gauntlet to the Almighty? Do you? You are already working within thhe confines of faith. So you`ve got to go along with Him.

Dekho Chaudhry Sahib: A dog is a dog is a dog. Anywhere. No dog of any goddamn place is better than a human being if you have brains or if you are a ``Muslim``. In the rational sense some dogs are better friends of their owners than their friends; [bring you your slippers, your paper, you kick `em, they still come to you, etc.] But that`s where their superiority over God`s Crowning Glory, Ashraf`ul`makh`luqat, ends.

You want to make something out of it? All right.

An inadequately imagined nation

By Dileep Padgaonkar

ISLAMABAD: Someone had once referred to Pakistan as an inadequately imagined nation. The writer obviously had in mind the flawed two-nation theory. Instructive in this regard is Gen. Musharraf`s answer to a question by a Bangladeshi editor at the impromptu press conference on July 2. The editor wanted to know what steps the Chief Executive, who had described himself as a man of peace, would take to ``heal the wounds of 1971``.

This was perhaps the only time that the General appeared to lose his cool. Here is what he had to say to the editor: ``Pakistan does not owe Bangladesh anything. Both sides made mistakes. We should forget the past. There were feelings of hurt on both sides. If you`re talking about compensations, reparations or some such thing, I`m afraid that is not possible.``

The birth of Bangladesh had demonstrated that culture and language were more important than religion to form the basis of a state. But there are few takers for that view in Pakistan. Nothing, not even the breakup of the country in the wake of a terrible genocide, would be allowed to challenge the two-nation theory.

In the history taught to Pakistanis, according to K K Aziz, the developments of 1971 receive cursory treatment. Students are told that Bengal played an insignificant role in the political awakening and cultural renaissance of the Indian Muslims, that it had a minor part in the growth of the Pakistan movement and that the East Pakistanis were always troublesome and disloyal. Students are, therefore, led to believe that the secession was a desirable development which deserves to be treated as a non-event.

Evidence of the ``inadequately imagined nation`` surfaces here in many garbs. For example, asked to explain the distinction between terrorism and jehad, the general said while he loathes terrorism, he uses the word jehad to indicate a struggle. It could be a struggle against poverty or illiteracy. In the same breath, however, he added it is the duty of every Muslim to rush support to Muslims who face oppression anywhere, including, in the first place, Kashmir. The word thus gradually acquired its original religious hue.

Take another example. At his improvised press conference, General Musharraf was questioned about Pakistani fears that India was not reconciled to Partition. Had these fears not dissipated following Atal Behari Vajpayee`s visit to the Minar-e-Pakistan in Lahore? The general replied that the gesture was purely symbolic, that it lacked sincerity. Why? Because Vajpayee had not committed himself to resolving the Kashmir dispute in accordance with the wishes of the Kashmiri people. Echoes, yet again, of the ``unfinished business of Partition``.

The need to ideologically demarcate itself from India often takes a bizarre turn. For the first time since 1947, Pakistan has officially objected to the use of the term ``Indian sub-continent``. It is only a matter of time, it would appear, before it finds fault with the term ``Indian Ocean``. Indeed, one Pakistani commentator does not like the term ``South Asia`` as well.

``When we talk of South Asia,`` writes Nazir Naji, ``Pakistan is relegated to the position of the backyard of a large sprawling India, whereas emotionally, culturally and mentally we are the beachhead of Central Asia and the Gulf. The term South Asia must comprehend within its meaning the special strategic dimensions of Pakistan.``

Against this background, one is left wondering whether Pakistan`s existential woes will end even if it manages to gain control of the Valley.

Asif Naqshbandi #214

What do you mean by institution of Caliphate is a must in Islam.

What is the meaning of Caliph first. Does he need to be elected, or he need to enforce himself. Because when you say democracy and caliphate are diametrically opposed, I presume you think army rule in the name of Islam is Caliphate. Or did I misunderstood you.

Second if you think, that Caliphate means, a central authority for Muslims. It has never been after Khulfae-Rashid.

But was it present during Khulfa-e-Rashid.

If so then tell me who was the true Caliph, Hazrat Ali or Hazrat Amir Muawiya.

Thank you for your nice and encouraging comments

Chief Justice.... Hope to hear from you in future too...I was impressed by your accomplishments...

Pakistan Zindabad

Asif Naqshbandi

I donot suffer fools gladly!

Your analysis of the history and of the rational religion of Islam ..... is indeed messed up.

In any event I donot wish to defend Ataturk, everyone on this forum will view your post with scorn.

I am going to say one thing... if you read about Ataturk closely you will see that he himself wanted to enlist Islam as an influence for he believed that Islam was the most natural and rational of all religions... but then he probably ran into people like you who made him hate religion.

I leave you the choice ... you can go on claiming

that Islam and Democracy are incompatible... in the case of which we will have to do away with Islam completely (because people like you have corrupted it) or you can expound upon the rational true Islam and state Democracy and Islam go hand in hand ... saving both Islam and Pakistan.

If people like you dont change your views, and consider me fascist if you may, we will be forced to choose Democracy over the medieval philosophy that you choose to claim exclusively as Islam...

My Islam is not irrational....

Pakistan Zindabad

Quaid e Azam Zindabad

Ataturk Zindabad

Jiye Bhutto

Imran Khan for PM

-Yasser Hamdani

http://www.jang.com.pk/thenews/jul2000-daily/07-07-2000/oped/o3.htm

EXCELLENT ANALYSIS !!!!

America sees reason

Masud Akhtar Shaikh

Of late there have been strong indications to the effect that our friends, the Americans, are no longer as annoyed with Pakistan as they were when some mysterious power forced Mian Nawaz Sharif to show his guts as the heavily mandated Prime Minister of Pakistan and pull the trigger for a few big bangs in spite of the US President`s repeated use of carrots and sticks over the telephone to dissuade him from taking that momentous decision. That was about two years ago.

Despite his extreme displeasure as a result of the Pakistani nuclear detonations, Bill Clinton must have been highly impressed by the admirable courage displayed by the man who held the destiny of this nation in his hands at that time. Alas, that image was to be demolished pretty soon when, haunted by the ghost of Kargil and daunted by the snow-clad spirits of Atal Behari Vajpaee`s dead soldiers lying unburied atop that famous mountain peak, MNS was to dash to the very threshold of the White House with knocking knees and a perspiring forehead, ready to obey whatever orders the US President had drafted for him.

That was a great fall, not only for Humpty Dumpty but also for the whole country. The nation was humiliated beyond repair. America must have felt reassured that the Pakistani partridge was still in her bag, in spite of having become a de facto nuclear power. Nevertheless, the US government took a number of steps against Pakistan to teach that country a lesson so as to deter it from behaving as audaciously as it had done in May 1998.

Come October 12, 1999, and the armed forces of Pakistan emerged on the political horizon, showing an offensively wide red rag to the American bull. On the face of it, what infuriated the US government and her western allies was the sad demise of our so-called democracy, but in fact the real reason for their indignant chorus against Pakistan`s new rulers was the unanticipated manner in which the latter had swept their country`s political stage clear of MNS and his stooges, all loyal friends of the US. Clinton could no longer be sure of the new leadership`s loyalty to the American cause. The only way to ensure that the military regime comes to its senses without causing much damage to US interests was to gather the support of all the American allies and tighten the noose around the new Pakistani rulers` neck as much as possible.

With that intention, a number of steps were taken against Pakistan. One such step was the revival of US flirtation with India for a full bloomed honeymoon, promising to make that `biggest democracy in the world` a cornerstone in the American global policies. Our economic strangulation was another link in the American chain of actions against the defiant new regime. It was as a cumulative result of America`s anti-Pakistan diplomacy that a widespread impression was created among our people that our country stood totally isolated at the global level and that all our economic problems were due to the arbitrary removal of the American prop on which our economy had been leaning for decades.

Somehow, within less than a year down the line, American fury against Pakistan seems to be gradually subsiding. Of all the people, it was the rugged Madeleine Albright who provided the lead in this connection by saying a few kind words about Pakistan in spite of her usually snobbish attitude towards the under-developed countries of the Third World. That was not very long ago. She acknowledged the difficulties facing the military regime while appreciating the various steps it was taking for the restoration of democracy in the country.

The softening of attitude has been travelling down the line. The latest in the chain is the recent statement of the US ambassador to Pakistan, William B Milam, who has gone to the extent of dispelling the widely held impression that Pakistan had been totally isolated at the international level. He has gone a step farther by saying that Pakistan is an important country not only for the region but also for the United States. ``We realise that Pakistan is an important country and we cannot ignore it``, he is reported to have said. He also assured that Washington wanted to see Pakistan economically strong and stable.

What could be the reasons for this pleasantly surprising change in the tone of the American administration? Strangely enough, our foreign office has not yet claimed the entire credit for successfully pacifying a disturbingly antagonised Uncle in whose service we have been made to spend almost the whole of our independent life as a nation, trying to keep him in good humour all the time. Maybe they have been rather too busy trying to meet the deadline given by the chief executive for the overhaul of their ministry so as to make it more efficient than it has ever been before. But to be fair to the worthy foreign minister, some credit for this change in the US attitude must be given to his setup.

However, it would be more logical to try and look for an answer to this riddle somewhere else. For example, the reason for American re-appraisal of the importance of Pakistan, not only for this region but also for the global interests of the US itself, could be the probable miscarriage of the love affair between America and India. It would be natural for any Romeo to feel jealous if his Juliet started flirting with a third person. This is exactly what seems to have happened right at the start of the exciting romance between Clinton and Vajpayee. The villain in this case could be none other than the stubby but smart Putin.

The newly-inducted Russian President has been going about, quite proudly exhibiting a highly impressive shopping list worth billions of dollars. The list gives details of Russian tanks, aircraft, and other important military hardware which India has agreed to buy from Russia in the immediate future. What other evidence did Bill Clinton need to be convinced about the treacherous nature of his new-found love? Could he place any reliance on such an unfaithful ally and assign him the important role of containing a mighty China, an over-ambitious Russia, or a threatening block of Islamic states of Central Asia getting inspiration from the Taliban of Afghanistan? Certainly not.



Clinton`s distrust of India must have been further reinforced by the Pakistani print media which has been constantly warning America about the proverbial unreliable behaviour of Hindus, both as individuals and as a nation. In the meantime, some insider might have whispered into Clinton`s ears that the famous Urdu proverb ``Baghal mein chhury munh mein Ram Ram`` (professing godliness with a knife concealed in the sleeve) is a true reflection of the Hindu mind and that he better be careful while embracing his Indian friends! Clinton`s conscience must have pricked him for having unjustifiably caused distress to an old ally like Pakistan. Hence a directive to Albright et al to mind their words while talking about Pakistan.

SameerJB #217

Thanks for the info. Hopefully initiatives like Dr Ali and Mr Daudpota`s will find sufficient support.

Sadhana

Satish: I do not believe seriously in Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT) either. It would be unfair to respondents to start an unrelated, nevertheless very interesting, topic on this thread. I hope to discuss our ancient identities with you and others depending on the next opportunity provided by the chowk on the front page. Thanks for the reply.

Sadna: Intersting that you brought up Dr. Mubarak Ali. He has written several books in Urdu which are readily available in Pakistani bookstores. He has been very critical of the behavior of modern Islamist Pakistani educators, politicians and thinkers for completely disregarding non-Islamic parts of history, society and culture. I can understand him being outcasted from the mainstream print media. I recall reading something about Allama Iqbal in one of his book which goes something like,`` he was impressed and wrote about Corboba mosque but never wrote about the great Badshahi mosque in his backyard``. Basically Mubarak Ali`s point is that we should appreciative of desis contributions in the areas of art, cutlure and history, at least as much as the contributions of others. He detests the Indian/ Pakistani Muslims elite mindset whereby everything desi is considered inferior to Persian, Arab and Turkic achievements.

Jul-5-00 11:1:39 EST Reply #: 216 Rooster-blues#200

Hey man, now I know for sure your are on bananas.

Either you`ve got glaucoma and can`t read, or don`t understand English well [in which case all your bananas are going waste, since the chimps are pretty proficient in English now].

You oxymoron-sans-oxy, I asked you, ``How does...?`` not when? Why would you ``do`` your sisters? I have heard of ``doing`` lunch or something such, but never brothers doing their sisters. I guess that`s the cost one pays in lack of learning when one is an only son, as I am. What is a pimp? And why should ANYBODY be your mother`s pimp? Is Pimp something like a pipe (band)? No, I am afraid you left me way behind. I am no match to your learning and culture. You must be a descendent of a very upper, comfortable patriarch, and be something we call aaraam`zadeh.

Very truly yours,

yj

Writing Indo-Pak history on the net

http://www.hindustantimes.com/nonfram/060700/detFRO05.htm

Excerpt:

``...To bypass the systematic distortion of history on both sides of the border, three projects are being attempted by Dr Mubarak Ali and Mr Isa Daudpota, a physicist by training — publishing anthologies of the writings of Pakistani and Indian historians for the Ancient, Medieval and Modern periods; trying to write a history of the subcontinent with an Indian counterpart and a project for collectively writing a school text-book of the history of the subcontinent on the net. The last of these is the brainchild of Mr Isa Daudpota (email: daudpota@huic.edu.pk) a consultant with Hamdard University in Islamabad. ...``

BTW, one sentence in the complete article provokes a chuckle, now which one would that be:-)?.

Sadhana

Mr. YLH sahab,

Please stop reposting the same old argument again and again. And as for your assertion that I should separate politics from religion--well, sir, in ISLAM, there is no such dichotomy and I`m sorry to say that your reading of the early history of the caliphate is totally outrageous! The first four khalifahs--Allah have mercy on them-were the leaders of the Muslims both SPIRITUALLY and POLITICALLY as that was what an ideal khalifate represented: the political, wordly and spiritual head of the Muslims. For us the rule of the Khulafa e Rashida was perfect and a role model for us. Khalifat is a fard kafaaiya on the Muslims.That is not a small matter in Shar`iat. That is why the whole Muslim world reacted with horror when Ataturk abolished the institute of the Caliphate...

I hope you will be open minded enough to read the following article. It may open up your mind to other ideas.

http://www.murabitun.org/programme/khalifate/kha5.html

Basically, the khalifate is a sacred institution of Islam and the form of governance preferred by the shar`iah, nay, required. To compare it with democracy is totally false as the two are diametrically opposed...