Faith, Religion and National Direction

Mateen,

It is heartening to see an army man articulating on the religio social ills of pakistan. Your insights are increasingly of paramout importance because army is the only institution except that of the mullahs which has survived the CE. Industrialists are gone, there has been no capital raisings in any stock exchange in pakistan sinec the CE took over. Politicians are near dead. Army has no challengers other than the jihadists and kashmir, chechniya, philippines etc keep them busy, surviving on the crums. Rest of the country is for the military.

Long live the pak military of the past, I hope the situation doesn`t change. Should I join ylh in shouting, pak army zindabad, may be I should, despite the meaning of zindabad and the track record.

regards

jay.

Good analysis but the problem is the following statement:-

``Doctrinal aspects of Islam were founded more than 1400 years ago and, unlike Christianity and Jewism, are not subject to re-interpretation.``

I will like to know what is wrong with re-interpretation?

Did God stopped making intellegent people who could think and analyse?

Did world stopped evolving 1400 years ago?

Did scientific advancement stopped giving correct reasoning of existence of Universe?

and so many more questions in the similar mode.

Any thought or belief that claims to be for all time to come has to show flexibilty of re-interpretation if not outright change in premises. If `Ijtihaad` was fine till 12th century, then it has to be allowed again and be made permanent so that outdated customs and prouncements which had relevance 1400 years ago but no longer suitable, can be discarded in view of changed world. I can`t understand how witness of a well educated fully aware woman of present century can be cosidered half of a man!

And finally why should God has problems if people use their brains and keep on meditating/reflecting on the secrets of this world. Is God such an egoist creature? Is he envious of his own creations?

THE NAME OF GOD,

Last week the US govt department, National air safety bureau released the 1700 page reprt onto the crash of Egypt Air B767. The report goes into the details of the activities of the copilot and concludes that the aircraft was crashed by the copilot, just to commit suicide. The unmistakable evidence was that he chanted an islamic prayer 11 times as the jet hurtled downwards. Instead of Allah, if he had said, oh holy s..it, or for that matter any other god, it would not have been a suicide. When it comes to air crash, the name of god reveals a lot, a lot about the prevailing view about the religion and its god.

It is easy to dismiss it as ignorance of the other, but religion is not in the book, it is in the lives and actions of the many, and in the actions of the few with the implicit support of the many. The reports in the front pages of pak news papers is a clue to the insatiable cravings for the good news delivered by the fighters for that god in kashmir.

I`ll reply in more detail a bit later when I`ve gathered my thoughts but just to say that that was a good article by Brigadier Sahib and to welcome hin to Chowk and also..what does he think of Prof. Tahir ul Qadri`s views as he espouses a ``moderate`` Islam different from say JI or the Hizb ul Islam (i.e. the Barelvi (Ahle Sunnat)) viewpoint. Would he accept Prof. Sahib in power and the changes he would expediate including the full implementation of Islam in the social, economic and political aspects of the Nation?

Details of the Prof.s exact plans later...

``O you who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority amongst you.``

Mohajir Saheb

I congratulate you on an excellently written and well argued article. I do have an issue with nationhood driven or defined by religion or by non-democratic means, but has to wait for later.

I look forward to your response to the comments raised by the various respondents.

Again, welcome to Chowk and thank you!

Sincerely

bd

satyavadi: #12 ``Secondly, India is dealing with the Jehadis, as they should be dealt with, and knows how to distinguish between them and other Muslims.``

I have heard this comment quite a bit from Indian contributors. It seems that the average person in India is convinced that India is only acting against Pakistani sponsored, ``militants`` when it kills Muslims. I am interested in finding out how everyone in India has come to this conclusion? Is it due to the Indian media? Or Indian politicians? Or due to any other reason?

The above is a common argument that is used by governments when they suppress a group of people in a certain area. For example, the Americans were only fighting the Soviets, and Soviet backed Commies when they were fighting in Vietnam. Any civilian killed was a commie. The Pakistanis were only fighting the Mukti Bahni and the Indian sponsored terrorists in E. Pakistan. Any civilian killed was an pro-Indian militant. The Germans were only killing Jews who had attempted to harm the German battle campaign. Any jew killed was an agent. So on and so forth.

Govts. come up with such stories to satisfy their general population. There is obviously some truth to it, i.e. there were commies in Vietnam, Mukti Bahni in E. Pakistan, double agent jews in Germany etc. But these groups only constitute a very minor portion of the opposition. Gurreilla groups, just by themselves, have never in the history of the world, I repeat never, been able to take on full-fledged well-trained and armed armies, all by themselves. The only time they have been successful is when they have the support of the general population of the area. This is why the Vietnamese were successful in Vietnam in taking on the fourth biggest army in the world (USA). This is why the Bangladeshis were successful in East Pakistan. And this is why the Indian army is having a lot of difficulty.

It doesn`t surprise me that govts. try to sell themselves as being the, ``good guy`` when they are suppressing a minority in a certain geographic area. What surprises me is the ease with which the general population is willing to believe their respective govts.

Brigadier sahib, you write with an incisciveness of a polished professional soldier. Your defense of the role of Islam in Pakistan`s polity is commendable and well argued. But I`d point out, respectfully, that the idea of ``Islam is good but the mullahs are the bad ones`` is an oft tried one, used occasionally to cover-up the inherent deficiencies of having a religio-political set-up. This was something the Quaid-e-Azam (called the Kafir-e-Azam by the Jamaatis of he time) warned about in more than one speech. One of the chowkwallas has hit it one the head: Islam needs a reformation a la Martin Luther. For while many aspects of Islamic doctrine, which you point out is unchangeable, are very fundamental to the functioning of a pluralist democracy, many teachings of the Faith are quite repugnant to such a system of governance. Whether democracy or autocracy are the better forms of governance is perhaps debatable. What is less debatable is the fact the Islam and pluralist democracies do not go hand in hand.

vicky #13:

[``There are so many keyboard strategists on chowk...``]

This is an interstng line...i think these so-called ``keyboard strategists`` are the life, colour and the spice of chowk...without these wonderful people around, the interactions in this place (any messageboard for that matter) would be like typical movie court-room scenes...

[``... it would be nice to hear from some real vardis.``]



i`d been reading the editorial/opinion columns of prominent subcontinent newspapers regularly and i can tell you that most of those columns are filled with the knowledge and perception - of the ``real vardis`` and many other wise people - that you really seem to crave for... read them on for a while and may be we`d realize that these lowly ``keyboard strategists`` are no less intelligent and brilliant than many of those high ranking analyst/strategist/senior fellow/expert people that fill our newspaper pages...

i don`t mean to offend anybody, least of all the author of this splendid article... but i just want you to remember there are a lot of people here, who always enthusiastically read whatever you post, but are always hesitant to post their own just for the fear that they might be stamped with the kinds of label that you have concocted here... please, see that your words ``fires up`` some poor soul to jump the fence and join the interaction and not crush the spirit of the half-hearted participants already here... we really really need many more these charming ``keyboard strategists`` here in chowk.....

Brigadier Sahab!

If the nation starts getting their liberty in few years, when will you hang the next Bhutto.

Don`t think that you are acceptable because our army has means to deliver something.

Recent Hamoodur-Rehman Commission report clearly put the blame on army (unlike your favourite dog Jamat-e-Islami which all along put the blame on Bhutto).

You can again fool the new generation, but we have already seen you to be bitten again.

If you think us Muslims then remember.

``A momin cannot be bitten by same hole twice``.

So after hanging Bhutto you have created fresh holes in the form of MQM, Nawaz Sharif, and we were ready to be bitten.

But do you think we will again be bitten by the same hole army.

Kuch Khuda Ka Khof Karo Or Ab Humara Peecha Choor Do.

Or at least stop propagating the same old age recipe which has already rotten the ears of whole nation.

Quickly finish your task of undoing of your own creation and have mercy on us.

Umairr #23,

Well said!

Umairr:

``I have heard this comment quite a bit from Indian contributors. It seems that the average person in India is convinced that India is only acting against Pakistani sponsored, ``militants`` when it kills Muslims``

No country or govt is a saint. And India is not an exception. India is acting against all militants and not just Pakistani sponsored militants in Kashmir (well if there is any distinction between the two). India is not systemically targetting Muslims anywhere. It just so happens that all the militants of Kashmir insurgency and their brethren from across the Ummah happen to be Muslims. Dont allege that India is killing the civilian population of Kashmir. If you wanna make such a claim, please back it up. In any insurgency, civilians suffer at the hands of the govt and the militants. Kashmiris are too, but it doesnt mean India is ``killing`` Muslims. Also if India is killing Muslims shouldnt it happen all over India? How come with all the sporadic violence and riots, Muslims are flourishing (atleast in population numbers) all over th country. Had India been targetting or ``killing`` Muslims, would the percentage of Muslims in Indian population increased between 1947 to now (If you want I can pull out authoritative statistics).

I am amazed how u could make a claim that ``India is killing Muslims``. Normally your posts argue on logic or on humanitarian concerns. This one does neither. Its not even worth discussing.

``India is killing Muslims``: Umairr, where is all your objectivity that you keep on harping on every once in a while on Chowk.

Your claim is so ludicrous, that its frustrating. Seems like some Asim Hayat`s ``passion`` has rubbed on you.

Satyavadi

Perhaps it might interest some on this forum to read the following at this address

http://www.rediff.com/news/2000/aug/17flip.htm

A quote from TVR Shenoy`s article

From time to time, and for purely educational purposes, I tune in to Pakistan

Television (PTV World). It is, from an Indian point of view, depressing. If there

is any hope of forging lasting peace between India and Pakistan, a few

evenings` worth of watching PTV World removes all illusions. Which brings up

the theme of this column: if I spoke of General Musharraf`s options last week,

it is time to examine those of India today.

It is a truism to say that Kashmir is at the crossroads today. There have been

so many of them that I occasionally get the feeling that everybody is moving in

circles. How many times have we heard both Delhi and Islamabad protesting

that they want peace? But there is a difference today; no, it is nothing to do

with nuclear arms, merely the lingering aftermath of Kargil.

Is there a growing, educated, exposed to the wide world and with solid economic power kind of middle class emerging in Pakistan, lately? I ask because maybe that is when balanced articles like the one above will start attracting debates and more importantly action in Pakistan with Pakistanis.

As for the Hamood Rehman report in the latest India Today, well, what else is new. Didn`t we all know it all along these years? Didn`t we know what was happening in East Pakistan in 1971, even though we didn`t have the Internet then? Believe me, in India, this report on Pakistan in 1971 does not actually shake the establishment.

Crypto #25

As your comments are well intentioned, let me elaborate:

By saying Keyboard Strategist, I didn`t mean to offend, because there are many very knowledgeable people here(which I did acknowledge in the same post, btw).

As far as strategy goes, a military person might be worse of than some civies on chowk. But I do expect a senior Army officer would know a lot of military details others might not have access to via newspapers. At the least it conveys credibility even if fake and makes the debate even more credible.

`...i think these so-called ``keyboard strategists`` are the life, colour and the spice of chowk...``

I agree with you a 100%! In fact, most of the time I read the replies before the main article for this same reason.

But remember while the Keyboard Strategists are the life at chowk, every now and then we require fodder; food for thought. And what could be better than to dissect an expert opinion?

-vicky

PS: Nothing wrong with Keyboards - provides a living during the day and entertainment by nights.

Umairr #23 :

[``It seems that the average person in India is convinced that India is only acting against Pakistani sponsored, ``militants`` when it kills Muslims. I am interested in finding out how everyone in India has come to this conclusion? Is it due to the Indian media? Or Indian politicians? Or due to any other reason?``]

Yes, there are other reasons.

someone might have answered this query before, but no harm in repeating, so i go here:

Umairr, any instance of a brutal suppression and butchery of a population by an army has invariably followed by a massive exodus of fleeing refugees into neighboring places... the moment that a stream of fleeing refugees cross a nation`s borders forms a watershed in a particular problem, for, from that moment onwards the problem automatically becomes internationalized whether that nation likes it or not... for example, consider all these favourite refugee cases:

bengalis into india from (erstwhile east) pakistan

tibetans into india from China

tamils into india from Sri Lanka

timorese into australia from Indonesia

bosnians into croatia from bosnia

albanians into montenegro from kosovo

chechens into ingushetia form chechnia

hutus into zaire from rwanda

jews into allover from all areas under nazis

the list is by no means complete... now, if the indians are mindlessly butchering and decimating the muslims in kashmir, why are they not fleeing to safety Uamirr ?... leave alone kashmir Umairr, quote me a single incident when a stream of refugees has crossed the indian borders due to oppression, suppression whatever... (hmm...there`s a specific exodus from india, but we have a special name for it: ``brain drain``)...

its not for no reason that the international community appear to be turning a blind eye to the ``brutal oppression`` of innocent kashmiris by india... their reactions are measured because they can see something which you can`t...

True, there are loss innocent lives in kashmir, due to operations by indian forces... (again uamirr, show me a single indian who has NOT conceded this fact) but no army involved in a counter insurgency operations can escape this problem... you know better umairr ;-)

please remember, the indian army operations in kashmir has more bitter critics in india than the rest of the world put together...

Re: Umairr #23 and Scout #27

Umairr says ``India kills Muslims`` and scout too somewhere earlier said that India is pushing Islam into a corner. Apart from Kashmir, where there have been casualties of all religions, I don`t think Muslims are suffering particularly anywhere in India. Interestingly enough, no Indian Muslim I have talked to date has complained of Muslims being killed in India for the sole reason that they are Muslims. Some might be discriminated against or maybe more. But who isn`t? Don`t Punjabis discrimate against Sindhis? Don`t Sunnis discriminate against Shia? Don`t Tamils discriminate against Kannadigas and vice-versa? Don`t Maharashtrians discriminate against non-Maharashtrians? Don`t Brahmins discriminate against non-Brahmin? This problem of discrimination is prevalent everywhere and it is most unfortunate, but to single out India is unfair. To dispel Scout`s and Umairr`s notions that India is actively persecuting and subjugating Muslims, I volunteer to host them if ever they can manage to make a trip to Delhi. I will take them around and I offer not to be present at the site where they can talk with Indian Muslims. Muslims are poor in India. But who isn`t? India is a poor country and the vast majority of the population is poor. Doesn`t anybody get it?