Marital Rape

It is quite unbelievable how a lot of you have reacted. There is no such thing as marital rape or marital torture of the wife - it is simply rape and torture of the worst kind. being raped and ortured by a stranger or strangers is terrible, traumatic and unforgivable on every level - but for a man who is meant to be your nearest and dearest, protector and lie partner to do such a thing is inviting hellfire instantly. may they all burn forever......

The true culprit is NOT religions, but those WHO EITHER MISINTERPRET RELIGIONS OR/& THOSE WHO INTENTIONALLY TWIST IT OUT OF CONTEXT: THIS IS DONE BY BOTH MEN & also BY WOMEN, LATTER FEFERRING TO RADICAL FEMINISTS & FORMER REFERRING TO TROLLS, WHO LIKE TO MAKE TROUBLE, they get off that way: it is like an addiction to trolls, to make trouble: men, including women, can be trolls, the true % is UNknow, as to how many exist within the population; but, that DARK SIDE of humanity exist MORE IN some THAN in others, likes shades of a color: it is more intense in some than in others, just as good can be more intense in some than in others, both [good & evil] are like shades of truth, different kinds of truth: but, as to which truth will win, is UNknown, since many obey blindly, without understanding: memorizing has it benefits, but is limited, that limitation can be expanded with understanding of the basic rules, which can manifest itself in other ways, different from what is 1st observed, which carries different meaning with time, with maturity, as observation[s] are analyased, over time, which effects culture & laws: and, both men & women are controlled & shaped by culture: those that control culture, control that are forced to follow a particular or another type of culture, within a limited choice. For example, for some it might be good for a man to have more than 4 wives, which the # of wives is limited to 4 or less; while, for others, a man ought to have only 1 or NONE @ all: MEANING IT DEPENDS: sometimes, a woman is so selfish & evil, that marriage ought to NOT be allowed for her: since she acts like a prositute, which does NOT mean that all prostitutes are evil: some are & some are NOT: it depends: on the woman: including abuse, which is NOT always abuse: but, sometimes, a reaction, & @ other times is abuse: MEANING IT DEPENDS: police obey politicians, who obey power of votes, which is often controlled by lobbies, who may or may NOT be good: MEANING IT DEPENDS: be cautious. And, as for alimony & child support in Western countries or countries influenced or/and controlled by Western influence, is NOT correct: both alimony & child support is form of condoning prostitution: both ought to be banned: if woman is stupid enough to willingly marry an abusive man, then she ought to find a different NONabusive man, without giving her reward for NOT taking responsiblity for her actions: she ought to think of consequence of action[s], which most women today do NOT, since the laws allow women NOT to think of consquence[s], which is forced upon men: and, some men get pissed off, when being forced to do everything, with women NOT sharing responsiblity for consequences for action[s]: equality ought to be about equal resonsiblity: if a woman likes to do stupid or/& crazy things, then her boyfriend ought to NOT be forced to constantly pay for her mistakes: yes: MEANING, HE OUGHT TO BE ABLE TO HAVE MORE THAN 1 GIRLFRIEND OR/& WIFE: YES.

Typing Error in previous message: i meant [messenger], & NOT (messageer): typing error: MEANING, even a [messenger] of god can make typing errors: including the 6th century prophet Mohammad: the # of wives, depends on what century the man is, & as well as IF the woman wants him as her husband, MEANING if man is in the 6th century, then he may have or is allowed upto 6 wives, which is why Mohammad, did NOT follow his own rules, including the rule of 4 wives: because it is based on my rules, which were passed to him, by tacyion particles, going back in time, carring my message & my believes, from me, to my previous self. And, as for him marrying a girl of age 9: psychology & physically, women mature @ earlier age, MEANING IF & WHEN a girl is 9 years old, her mind & body is mature that of a 16 year old boy: when a girl is of age 16, her mind & body is mature that of a 25 year old man: and, when a woman is 25 years old, a man with similar maturity, in mind & body, is 36 years old: that is the bases of Mohammad marrying a girl of age 9: the reason. Equation: [boy or man[`s] age] = [{(girl or woman[`s] age)^(1/2)} + 1]^2: in # of years.

Marital rape is as controversial as violence: just as some are allowed to commit violence, while other are not: the same applies for marital rape, meaning it is both situational, as well as it depends on the type of man & his motives, as well as the type of woman that he is married to: MEANING, some types of men are NOT allowed to rape their wi[fe/ves], while other[s] are: it depends: just as you can NOT say NO to EVERYTHING, SIMILARLY, you can NOT say YES to EVERYTHING: it is situational: MEANING: some women trap man/men; while, @ other times men trap woman/women; while, @ other types the woman is ignorant or being stupid; while, @ other types the man is ignorant or being stupid: it depends: MEANING, COMMON SENSE OUGHT TO RULE: WHAT TYPE OF COMMON SENSE: THE KIND THAT IS OBVIOUS: MEANING: not the kind that plays into the hands of radical feminists, NOR that plays into the hands of trolls, which can be either man or woman. And, as for religions, it is slice of truth, NOT ENTIRE TRUTH: BUT, A SLICE OF TRUTH: MEANING, no religion is entirely correct, NOR entirely incorrect: each religion is/has equal % of truth, like a slice of pizza: and, as for Islam, it is based on number [0], as well as dividing up authority equally between good & evil & between men & women: MEANING 25% TO EACH GROUP: 25% TO evil men, 25% to evil women, 25% to good men, & 25% to good women. The reason that i know this is because i`m the reincarnate of Mohamad: tacyion particles pass through my body & mind & carried my thoughts & believes back in time, to my previous self, to person known as Mohamad: his visions was NOT his, but mine: he only thought it was his, but it was mine: i`m also reincarnate of Khrisna, Budha, Christ, Mohmad, & Nostradamus, & a dozen other person, in the past: my ideas were stolen, before i had chance to publish it: it was taken & given, to past selves of mine, by reality: to guide the human race: to give the human race a moral compass: THE reason that i`m UNknown, is that i lack sufficient C# points: to teach myself humility: i will NOT make the same mistake in my next life: MEANING, I NEED SUFFICIENT C# POINTS TO HAVE POWER TO GUIDE THE HUMAN RACE, WHICH I LACK IN THIS PARTICULAR REINCARNATION: MEANING, THE END OF DAYS IS COMING, AFTER 1 CENTURY, WHEN I WILL BE REBORN, WITH MORE POWER, IN TERMS OF C#, IF THE HUMAN RACE CONTINUES TO BE LOST IN ITS MORAL GUIDELINE, IT LACK OF USE IN COMMON SENSE: meaning, marital rape is & is NOT allowed: that contradiction is partly based on the philosopher, Herculius, who was probably my previous reincarnation: the idea of contradiction, MEANING YES CAN BE NO, AND WISE-VERSA, since women are often rules by psychology of contradiction: such as, many, not all, but many women dress sexy, even though they do NOT want to be raped: MEANING, WOMEN NEED MORAL COMPASS OF MEN, WOMEN ARE OFTEN MORAL IDIOTS, EQUAL %, JUST AS MEN CAN BE MORAL IDIOTS: BEING MORAL IDIOTS IS NOT IN EITHER MEN OR WOMEN, BUT EXIST IN BOTH MEN & WOMEN, ELSE YOU WOULD NOT HAVE RADICAL FEMINISM, WHICH NEEDS MEN TO ALLOW WOMEN THEIR RADICAL BELIEVES, WHICH is & is NOT accurate, meaning is & is NOT true: it depends on situation & person[s] involved. IF you believe me to be reincanate of Mohamad & the true messageer of god: worship me & obey me: i will guide to wisdom, which is just as important as $, which is NOT everything.

Re: # 423

Hi # 423, I am blown over by your brilliant analysis. So we can`t blame a husband if he goes whoring, because his wife refused him. Ouch! So if by man ``can`t get it up,`` can I find another, worthier one, who can actually do it even if he is not my legally wedded man? Can I sexually abuse my husband if he is impotent?

I`m sure I`ve read this article elsewhere. But it still horrifies me no matter how many times I read it. I`ve published on rape before and I know from my own research how traumatic it is. Marital rape is a reality as Haneef has tried to show. ``

The lack of education, chauvinistic and literal translations of the Holy Book are the reasons behind such legalised brutality. It is the same argument which some men make about beating their wives. An in-depth reading of Holy Book reveals that the Prophet (PBUH) indicated that if a wife does not obey her husband, he is allowed to ``beat`` her with a miswaak!

It is chauvinistic interpretation of ill-education clergy that prompts such ignorance in our societies. As a woman, I am horrified at the mere existence of such depravity in our societies. Since time immemorial, societies have tried to control women`s sexuality which they find dangerous. Islam as a philosophy seeks restraint of all sexuality - male and female. We need to eradicate the myths around marital rape (and the forced confusion between rape and adultery viz a viz the hudood act) in order to progess and afford our women their correct status in society.

vaf - can you please explain how your comment ties in with the topic of Marital Rape. How does polygamy or a mention of slavery have anything to do with Rape?

One final point. Quaran is written in allegory - so its open to many interpretations. Your interpretation maybe different from mine. I think that is a big problem too because everyone can bend it to fit their needs. On an unrelated note, religion is a personal thing and no state should be allowed to force it upon its people as interepreted by a few scholars.

Islam remains the only religion that has restricted the number of marriages and at the same time has not allowed any extra marital affairs. The condition clearly says that if you cannot do justice with all your wives then you must live with one marriage. Can anyone of us claim they can do justice (treat all alike economically, physically emotionally) ? This was to stop the polygamy. Like Islam said of slaves that you have to give them to eat what you eat and the room to live where you live yourself and to dress how you did.... And then free slaves for even minor mistakes like leaving a ramadan fast.... People must look into religion not the people to understand islam. Muslim is not one who born of muslim parents but who practice Islam. The world may have changed this idea but quran does not say like this... Islam is quran and hadith not what followers of Islam are doing... Turn to the book and lot will be revealed to you... I promise.
Vaf

Shayar78 #423 please refer to #422. May God shine the light!

Husband and wife are supposed to be compatable. Both should respect each other`s feeling. If a poor husband wants to have sex with his wife which is legal and his wife does not obey, I think his wife should not mind her husband going for whoring. If there are cases of sexual violence, it is an inhuman crime but we should also see why the husband has done so. In most cases the wife has some sexual affair with a paramour, which a husband can`t tolerate and abuse her sexually.

A very well written article. I wish more and more people would understand the importance of a woman`s opinion and the fact that listening to a woman does not imply subservience to her wishes.

We in Pakistan have a very long way when it comes to the granting people basic rights and freedoms. Just like many other countries have, we need to have well defined charter of rights and freedoms. Unfortunately, we have too many state and bureaucratic institutions that contradict any such action. The first thing that needs to go is the Shariat Court and any such law that treats the testimony of a man over a woman or a muslim over a non-muslim as superior.

Thats the tip of the iceberg. We have lots more to do. I hope some of the main newspapers in Pakistan pick this article up and print it.

Damn the society. It forces a woman to marry and when that marriage goes wrong it forces her to compromise.
Damn the society. All our socalled Izzat revolves around a woman. what about men.
Damn.. R we willing to destroy our own gender privelege in whatever form it mite be present in us, be it the way men r asked first to partake of the family meal when everybody sits down for it.

CAN WE FINALLY BE AFRAID OF ALLAH THEN OUR EGOS AND DESIRES AND SPEAK UP AGAINST INJUSTICE. IF NOT FOR ANYTHING ELSE BUT ONLY TO SAVE OUR OWN HUMANITY.

krashid
#415

You have made a very good point. The concept of ``morality`` changes with time. I think the Prophet is very unfairly criticised by many re his choice of wives etc. That was culturally & morally APPROPRIATE in those days. Who the hell are ``we`` to morally judge those customs?

In Hinduism, polygamy/polyandry was allowed in olden days. Ram`s father Dasrath had 3 wives. God`s avatar Krishna was glorified for the number of women he probably ``knew``. Draupadi had 4 husbands (hey, good for her!). Does anybody care to speculate what kind of an ``arrangement`` the 5 Pandavas had for ``conjugal`` activities?! Maybe they had a ``6-some``!

The Old Testament has several accounts of Holy men having concubines.

Jefferson had many children from a black slave women. Many of the founding fathers of America screwed their slaves. I bet they never missed going to Church every Sunday! And they make a huge deal about Clinton! :)

C`maan, people who get cheap thrills about ridiculing the Prophet should understand the social & cultural times he lived in.

This was a much needed article. But society is too full of hypocrites to change. It condemns rape in front of the whole world, but what goes on between a husband and a wife should always remain hidden, society does not like to listen to their problems. And the woman always has to submit, eventually. Otherwise, it`s not just her husband who will call her frigid, but her best friends, her mom, her aunts. People who should love her and sympathize with her are the ones who eventually end up driving her insane.

things you have discussed in 6,7 and 8th para are alright.. i agree obviously wrong and totally unacceptable, neither socially nor religiously.

but i believe sex in marriage means nothing. yes, making love means. and when there there is love this issues dont really arise.

btw what if a man has sex with her wife by force not hurting her, then what do u want to be done with him. do u want to pull him into court or somethin for that!!!??!!!

PM #414

Since somehow my post did not went through, let me give you translation from Koran at least. So you withdraw from your first statement that this incidence is given in Koran. (and if you find please let me know). I will not discuss further sources. I hope you will find the rest of things which I discussed if you try.

``Allah has not put two hearts in a person`s body, nor HE has made those wives of yours whom you divorce by Zihar your mother, nor He has made your adopted sons your real sons.These are the things which you utter from your mouths, but Allah says that which is based on reality, and HE alone guides the right Way. Call your adopted sons after their father`s name:this is more just in the sight of Allah. And if you do not know who their fathers are, then they are brother`s in faith and your friends. There is no blame on you if you say something unintentionally, but you will surely be to blame for what you say with the intention of your hearts. Allah is forgiving and merciful.

Indeed the Prophet is preferable for the believers to their own selves, and the Prophet`s wives are their mothers. But according to the book of Allah, the blood relatives have a greater right on one another than the other believers and migrants. However you may do any good (you wish) to your friends. This is written in the Divine Book.`` 33:4-6

Now tell me Mr. PM where is the supposed incidence you mentioned is in Koran except that adopted sons are not real sons which I have already mentioned in my post.

Zahra #415

If you look at issue in correct context. Social structure, you will realize that whether there was Islam or christianity or Hinduism these things will happen the same way.

For example I realize that even in this society there are lot of bondings as far as true love (or whatever you can say) or relationship is concerned. For example not a good example but Bosses usually do favor for sex. That is a common things (and I have fought tooth and nail to eliminate my place of work of this) and people usually try to adopt themselves to the situation. The farther you go away from city where job opportunities are less the more it is (or at least this is my observation).

Considering a tribal society, and tribal culture, they will consider their custom as Islamic. See how the taking off of Purdah by my family members is not considered un-Islamic. And the famous saying that ``Purdah To Aankhon or Dil Ka Hota Hai`` etc.

They are a stage in society. To tell you I still meet the old generation of whites who lament on increasing ``Behayai`` unwed mothers, not taking care of children etc.

Although I donot condone it, but I see it as a social developmental stage.

The question is what is the solution. Without self-sufficiency, education and economic opportunity for our countries, it is not possible for the majority of population to come out of this cycle. A few like you and me will cross the barrier, but continuous generation of population in that enviornment will continue to produce the vicious cycle.

PM #414

I will not go to books for the simple reason, I am not interested in this debate with you.

I have read enough of this incident to bring me a half baked story by you from that great modern historian.

If you are interested, you can do it yourself.

If you want I can give you some links for translation of Koran by Picktall, Yusuf Ali etc.

If you need, I can give you link for Hadith also.

So! Bye Bye.

``In this matter recent court rulings in Pakistan substantiate this point that primary importance is wishes and decision of bride and groom even if it is against the wishes of guardian if it is within Islamic bounds (marriage to a Muslim Male)``


KRashid:

I will just focus on your above point. There are family laws and according to them certain things are written in black and white. In case of marriage, your social structure also kicks in. There are many cultural things that also get involved. So, we cannot take a bird`s eye view in this scenario. Islamically, a woman has the right of divorce. How many Pakistani Muslim men are comfortable granting that right to their wives ?
Peope wouldn`t even like to think about it. Why? When the religion[that is so well-practiced by the Holy Men of our country] allows a woman this right, who the hell are these men to NOT allow that very right to their wives ? I simply get amazed to read such hypocrisies.

I have just given an example of the prevalent discrepancies. Unfortunately, when I see and read such conflicts, I feel our society misuses religion for its convenience.

I remembered a junior, an engineer - who after her graduation started teaching somewhere in Peshawar - was to marry her father`s colleague. Can you believe that? In this day and age? I heard this few years back, and I was so disgusted that had no words.

Let`s pick the case of Pathans!!!Can their women go out and say that they would like to marry XYZ so they should be granted this right. Well, let`s wait for another century to pass!

re. #413

KRashid, you write...

``So it is not possible that prophet PBUH saw her first time.``

I did not say that it was the first time he saw her. I said he saw her half dressed, just out of the shower (so to speak). I also mentioned out that he was troubled that he found her so ummm... sexy. This is quite clear from the text in the Quran itself. (please don`t make me go find my (t)rusty Pickthall now :)). It is in this context that I find your speculation on the discord in Zayd`s marriage a little hard to believe.

You write:

``It is more related to status. Zaid was a slave and later adopted son. She disliked it probably after marriage and there can be many reasons for initially marrying and later disliking.``

Maybe, but none are mentioned in either the Quran or any ahadith. Furthermore, there is no indication that SHE CHOSE to divorce Zaid and marry the Prophet. All we know in this regard is that Zaid offered her to `father`.

``The wording in Koran is mostly related to marrying the adopted son`s wife is allowed. The rest is deduced from other sources``

Actually, I`m quite sure that the incident of Mohammed walking home upset is mentioned in the Quran. Will have to look it up. And yes, the wording in the Quran is related to marying the adopted son`s wife, because in that age and place, there was little or no distinction between a biological and adopted child. Until that ayat was revealed, that is.

rgds,

PM

PM #412 and other posts.

As far as Zaid`s wife is concerned, I forgot the name of mother of believer. She was a near relative of Prophet PBUH himself from Mecca. So it is not possible that prophet PBUH saw her first time. It is more related to status. Zaid was a slave and later adopted son. She disliked it probably after marriage and there can be many reasons for initially marrying and later disliking.

The wording in Koran is mostly related to marrying the adopted son`s wife is allowed. The rest is deduced from other sources.

What incidence you are describing I have read probably from the same source you have read but I don`t think writer has any clue regarding the society and circumstances.

As for the matter of 6-9 year old. I have clearly stated that the position ultimately turns out like this that you cannot marry a person without her consent or force her to marry against her wishes even if it is done by Guardian. But that is a logical deduction. And widow or divorcee is free to choose if she likes. And same goes for a person able to make her decision.

So there is no contradiction at least I don`t see.

In this matter recent court rulings in Pakistan substantiate this point that primary importance is wishes and decision of bride and groom even if it is against the wishes of guardian if it is within Islamic bounds (marriage to a Muslim Male)

correction:

In my last post, I wrote:

``It appears from this case that wali consent is not even an issue, since `consent` implies a choice made by the woman/girl in the first place.``

`Implies` should be replaced with `presupposes`.

Krashid,

further to my last post...

Your post points out that there is no mention of Wali in any of the ayat. But that does not conclusively prove that wali-consent was or was not required. So perhaps we must look for clues in practices of the Prophet and his companions.

You say (to Solitude)... ``Either your mental capacity is very small, or you live in a place where you have not come in contact with humans and their behaviour. Otherwise, you don`t expect a 6 or 9 year old to take decision regarding her marriage.``

Maybe you don`t realize this but you just shot yourself in the foot. If marriage was permitted to a child who could not possibly be expected to show her dissent or understand what she was getting into, your case seems to be very shaky indeed. It appears from this case that wali consent is not even an issue, since `consent` implies a choice made by the woman/girl in the first place.

I trust you will give this some thought before again start hurling platitudes re. `Western masters` and Islam-bashing my way again :-)

rgds,

PM



P.S. Anyone wishing to point out a contradiction in my statement that a 6-9 yo cannot be expected to show dissent, and my oft-stated stance of adolescent sex rights... well, shoot!

Krashid #405:

Your relation of the circumstances under which The Prophet married Zaid`s wife is rather interesting, but I think inconsistent with what is related in the Quran itself.

You say ``His wife was not happy with him and wanted to marry prophet PBUH. But problem was that Zaid was foster son. And once that restriction was clarified, she married on her own with Prophet PBUH.``

Perhaps you could point to an ayat or sunnah stating Zaid`s wife`s discontent in her marriage? Because as I read it in the Quran itself, THe Prohet was struck by her beauty on seeing her half dressed, and reprimanded himself all the way home for looking upon his daughter-in-law in that way. Later, God reveals that it is all right for him (the Prophet) to wed his foster-son`s wife.

I`m sure you are aware of the rest of the story (Zaid offer her to the Prophet etc.). I am curious to know where it is related that she was not happy with Zaid, as I have not read that anywhere. Perhaps my understanding of the story is incomplete or inaccurate, in which case I hope you can bring me nearer to the truth.

rgds,

PM

KRashid,

Out of curiosity, why do you try and engage in debate with Solitude?. His mind has only one way of thinking. Everything about Islam is evil--period! Nothing anyone will say will make him think twice.

Your religion is between you & God. No matter what people like Solitude says, you have enough faith & pride in it to withstand anything he says. Every religion or holy book can be twisted to be insulting & blasphemous. And there will be people who do it all the time. Accepting that is a fair price to pay for the freedom of expression; whether it is in the US or in the cyberworld.

Maybe we should all learn to have a thicker skin if we have to share viewpoints on Chowk.

re. Solitude #402 &403

My statement regarding the wali-consent requirement in Islam was based on an article by Asma Jilani during the time Saima Waheed was in protective custody. She seemed to have claimed that there was nothing in the Quran to justify the tradition.

You have a point on that Islam cannot be seen minus the fiqh when it suits followers, so long as the doors if ijtema are kept shut, anyway. I guess we shall just have to define exactly what we mean by Islam in these interacts.

But surely, are you not overstating the influence of the sources you quoted? Can Muslims not reject them and still be consistent with the essential tenets of Islam?

Having said that, it is intersting to wonder whether Ylh`s `Islamic culture` is more a reflection of the fiqhs, since he seems to be opposed to the literal following of the Word in matters of the State/law. I sense little contradiction... or wanting to have it both ways...

don`t quite know

rgds,

PM

krashid #404 Zahra #405 I have found it impossible to engage Solitude in a rational dialogue. You will have more luck with a robot. I would only add one more thing to what krashid writes: It is also written in the Quran that you cannot take a woman against her wishes.

Solitude and Zahra#

For your benefit I am presenting translation.

I find no evidence for Wali any where. Even in regards to orphan under guardianship, it is the property and not marriage which is recorded so I was even mistaken on that in my previous post.

``Divorced women shall wait concerning themselves for three months period. Nor it is lawful for them to hide what Allah hath created in their wombs, if they have faith in Allah and Last day. And their husbands have a better right to take them back in that period, if they wish for reconciliation. And women shall have rights similar to the rights against them, according to what is equitable; but men have a degree (of advantage) over them.`` Baqara 2:228

I don`t see any Wali here.

``If any of you die and leave widows behind, THEY SHALL WAIT CONCERNING THEMSELVES four months and ten days: When they have fulfilled their term, there is no blame on you if THEY DISPOSE OF THEMSELVES in a just and reasonable manner.`` 2:234

``When you divorce women, and they fulfil the term of their ``Iddat`` either take them back on equitable terms or set them FREE on equitable terms; but do not take them back to injure them (or) to take undue advantage; if anyone does that he wrongs his own soul`` 2:231

These Ayah clearly show the right of women to choose or decide and Wali has no role to play as decider.(Although in different socio-economic circumstances it may take different form and also as long as our Mullahs are alive they will find some way to circumvent this like marriage with Quran etc)

Solitude:

I cannot resist telling you that you are really out of your mind. Please read KRashid`s post carefully.

KRashid:

ditto! Good One!

Solitude #402

Initially I thought you have some understanding of Islam and Koran.

But after reading your various posts, I reached the impression that whatever you find regarding Islam bashing you will put it (or more appropriately utilizing some site as a source of your Intellectualism)

For example you are trying to equate Fiqh with Islam. While Fiqh or interpretation of Islam is related to the time period in which it was written.

For example, you are saying that Even a widow or divorcee needs the permission of Wali.

In Koran (either for Divorcee or widow or both) it is said that They should wait till Iddat is completed for remarriage, there is no mention of Wali in this regard. Moreover, it is even allowed to propose them (in some form) during that period and there is no mention of Wali in this regard also..

In fact the only place I remember where the Wali or guardian is mentioned is regarding foster care. And in that also Wali is urged not to transgress the limit.

Also if you know Islamic rituals, it asks permission of both boy and girl before marriage can be legal.(But how can you) And if anyone of them refuses the contract is not valid.

As far as guardian is concerned, he is allowed to take decision regarding marriage, but not without the permission of bride or groom. This is the correct position as far as I know.

As far as the question, that can bride and groom marry against the wishes of parents. Since you gave example of Aisha (to which you are very fond of). I will give you the example of Zaid. His wife was not happy with him and wanted to marry prophet PBUH. But problem was that Zaid was foster son. And once that restriction was clarified, she married on her own with Prophet PBUH. Either your mental capacity is very small, or you live in a place where you have not come in contact with humans and their behaviour. Otherwise, you don`t expect a 6 or 9 year old to take decision regarding her marriage.

As far as your quote from Ibn-Timia (and I am pretty sure they are partial but who knows you are also just cutting and pasting), there are many writings among Muslim Ulema who take the position opposite of Shafaee etc.

``Why should news this surprise anyone? Islam, after all, clearly states that a woman cannot be forced into a marriage without consent. `` #394

How can you say this even after countless tragedies like those of Saima Waheed ? The concept of forcing your daughter to get married (and the concept of ``Wali``) is part of an Islamic concept (imported and alien to us). It is not part of Pakistani culture. Yet even today thousands of underage girls are sold to Arabs (while the Arabs wage their sectarian proxy wars on our subcontinent) and Pakistani parents kidnap their own daughters on a daily basis from Europe and America so that they may be forcefully married and imprisoned in Pakistan.

How it is supported by Islam read onto the next post #402

How can you say this even after countless tragedies like those of Saima Waheed ? The concr daughter to get married (and the concept of ``Wali``) is part of an Islamic concept (imported and alien to us). It is not part of Pakistani culture. Yet even today thousands of underage girls are sold to Arabs (while the Arabs wage their sectarian proxy wars on our subcontinent) and Pakistani parents kidnap their own daughters on a daily basis from Europe and America so that they may be forcefully married and imprisoned in Pakistan.

Muslims regard Ibn Taymiyaa as the ``Sheikh of Islam``. He truly is. He is the author of great many huge volumes on various subjects. From his works if we open Vol. 32, pp. 29 and 30, we read,

``Even if the virgin is an adult, her father may force her to get married. This is in accordance with Malik Ibn Ons, al-Shafi and Ibn Hanbal’s.``

On page 39, he also states:

``The young virgin can be forced by her father to get married without being consulted.``

This is the verdict of Ibn Taymiyaa who was joined by some great Legalists (Remember the clerics and Imams derive their ``fatawa`` from the Quran and Ahadith) such as Imam Shafii, Imam Malik, Ibn Hanbal, and the professors of Islamic law at the inception of Islam in M and Madina. Most Arabs and most Islamic countries embrace their teaching. Actually, if we study Malik Ibn Ons book (Vol. 2, p. 155), we read:

``A father can force his virgin daughter, his maid-slave and his male-slave to get married.``

What is Ibn Hazm’s opinion concerning the daughter’s marriage? How can we ignore the opinion of the chief Legalists of Islam in this respect? It is well known that Ibn Hazm also composed huge volumes of books on various topics on which all contemporary Muslim scholars rely because he is one of the greatest scholars of the Islamic law through the ages. In his sixth volume, part 9 of his book al-Muhalla (``The Sweetened``, pp. 458-460), he says,

``A father may give his consent to have his young virgin daughter married without obtaining her permission, for she does not have a choice, exactly as Abu Bakar Al Siddiqui did to his daughter, Aisha, when she was six years old. He married her to the prophet Muhammad without her permission.``

Then Ibn Hazm adds:

``Even if she was deflowered (previously married and divorced, or a widow) as long as she is young and has not reached the legal age, her father may force her to marry without obtaining her permission.``

As long as she is a virgin or just still young, she can be forced to get married without her consent. These are unequivocal, plain words. ``Without her consent``, and ``does not have any choice.`` These are the cruel words which a free human conscience utterly rejects and detests because it is related to the most important subject in a girl’s life, that is, her body and her future.

If enrolling in a certain school or seeking employment for a particular job, even buying a house or a car, should be in accordance with a person’s choice, how much more should choice control the issue of a girl’s marriage? We acknowledge that a girl should consult with her parents in this matter, and their duty is to offer their sound opinions to protect her interest and future, but we cannot understand or even imagine that a father may force her to get married to a man she does not know and has never met. This is Islam!

These are not just mere words. This is actually what happened to the prophet of Islam because Abu Bakr, al Siddique who was Muhammad’s friend, wed him to his daughter, Aisha, when she was six years old, and the consummation marriage took place when she was nine years old, according to all the Muslim scholars and Chroniclers, without exception. Even Aisha related the story of her marriage. Muhammad narrates having wetdreams about Aisha when she was three years old (and he was in his 50s!) and there are sound ahadith about a wife so young she used to play with her dolls.

The difference in their ages was 45 years! Muhammad at that time was 54 years old, the age of her grandfather, but what is significant for us now is not the great difference in age, but rather Aisha’s marriage without her permission. Even she was taken by surprise when she found out about it.

What about a son? In part nine, page 462, Ibn Hazm stresses that it is not permissible for the father to force his son to get married.

The reader may be interested to read the text recorded in Sahih Muslim (Vol. 3, p. 577) with the commentary of al-Nawawi, because this book is a basic, indispensable book. Aisha said,

``The messenger of God betrothed me when I was six years old and then married me when I was nine years old.``

This is a clear text which makes it permissible for a father to make his daughter marry without obtaining her permission. All Muslims consent to that (with the exception of those who intend to obfuscate the truth by denying their own sources), and she did not have the option of nullifying this marriage which her father planned. This is according to Malik, al-Shafi’i and the rest of Hejaz Legalists.

This was from Sahih Muslim, and a similar text is reiterated several times in Sahih al-Bukhari, part 7.

HLAHIL #398 Study the Quran, you idiot, and you will realize how far off track you are. I will ignore your personal insults.

HLAHIL#398

Aap Kasar Nafsi Se Kam Le Rahe Hain.

Maulana has not changed the life of thousands, but millions.

We are still in darkness, illiteracy, poverty, and Military Rule (thanks to the great visionary called Maulana Mowdudi)

Do you believe Maulana Mowdudi when he said that It is better to bury alive the wommen rather than sending them for nursing.

And his disciple Mian Tufail said ``These modern women needs to dragged with their hairs in streets.

Bhai HLAHIL Yahan Kahan Aa Gaye. Mansoora Jayiye. Aap Ki Har Baat Pai Pe Log Sur Hilain Gai. Agar Aap Islam Ka Naam Le Kar Sharab Bhi Pi Lain To Koi Nahin Pooche Ga.

1.
----
http://www.dawn.com/2001/01/08/letted.htm#6
Facts about Hudood laws

ORDINARILY I would refrain from joining issue with a colleague lawyer but since Ms Shahida Jamil holds a responsible ministry of law, justice and human rights, as such her letter to the editor dated 23.12.2000 must be responded to.

The honourable minister admits that the reporting of her interview published on 9.12.2000 was correct but the caption was misleading. She presumes that every person reacts by reading headlines alone. Let me assure her that I am a serious news reader and do not simply glance through the papers as a past-time.

Ms Jameel`s contention that the Hudood laws are not discriminatory and their implementation makes them so, is not correct. This controversy gives her an excellent opportunity to clarify her position. For example, does the law minister consider that the evidence of four male Muslim witnesses for awarding Hadd punishment for rape and zina are fair and not discriminatory?

I know that the Hadd punishment has so far not been executed but as long as the law remains operative, it can beimplemented. Does she support this provision which makes the evidence of women inadmissible?

The law minister is rightly shocked at the number of accused who are released because of lack of evidence in karo kari cases. The root cause is systematic discrimination of women in law and society. She must also be informed that many accused have been convicted but given very light sentences. Our courts have ruled that killing of ``immoral`` women, is an act of ``honour``, because of provocation offered by such women. The law allows the victim`s heirs to forgive the accused. In almost 90% of karo kari cases, it is the family themselves who kill women. Is this law gender sensitive?

I am advised by the law minister to read Shariat closely. No one practising in Pakistan can avoid doing so. ``Nikah`` according to Shariat is fundamental and is common knowledge. However, the reality on the ground remains that in a number of cases ``Nikah`` takes place but ``Rukhsati`` is postponed. Under the law, a husband may rape his wife before ``Rukhsati`` but will not be liable for any punishment. Is this correct or not? If this is the position in law, then does the law minister consider this act of rape as a crime or a right of the husband? The law minister, I presume, is also aware of cases where after the rape had been committed a Nikahnama was manufactured as a defence and the accused acquitted. This would not have been possible if the law recognised marital rape as an offence.

The letter has amazed me, as the law minister defends the provision in the Quanoon-e-Shahadat, where the testimony of women is not at par with men. She has done so on the assumption that this is a form of protective legislation. She, however, failed to elucidate how are women afforded protection by this provision and from whom? I fail to see how equating the testimony of two women to that of one man in matters relating to future and financial obligation helps women. Giving evidence, is not a matter of privilege but a necessity. Women cannot be deprived of their right to do so under the garb of protection. Incidentally the Nawabpur incident is misquoted as it had no nexus with the evidence of women. The law minister may check her facts.

I do hope, the law minister will respond, so that her position on these issues is further clarified.

ASMA JAHANGIR
Lahore


2.
----
http://www.dawn.com/2001/01/16/letted.htm#11
Facts about Hudood laws

I refer to the letter from Ms Asma Jahangir on the above subject (Dawn Jan 8).

I do not wish to enter in legal debate. But her two remarks have hurt me deeply. She has posed two questions, rather sarcastically, relating to Hudood laws, presumably not realising that she has questioned the Quranic injunctions themselves.
She says:

Does the law minister consider that the evidence of four male Muslim witnesses for awarding Hadd punishment for rape and zina are fair and not discriminatory?``

``I fail to see how equating the testimony of two women to that of one man in matters relating to future and financial obligation helps women. Giving evidence, is not a matter of privilege but a necessity. Women cannot be deprived of their right to do so under the garb of protection.``

I would requested her to go through the Quranic verses 4:15 and 2:282 to remove her derision. She will find the Quranic injunctions very clear and unambiguous on the two subjects. If she has any other interpretation of these verses, it is her choice. There is no compulsion in Deen.

ISHRAT HUSAIN

Karachi


3.
----
http://www.dawn.com/2001/01/27/letted.htm#5
Evidence of women

ON January 16, Mr Irshad Hussain has once again asked me to go through the Quranic verses 4.15 and 2:282 regarding evidence of women. He alleges that I was sarcastic in my letter. No Sir, I was dead earnest in knowing the official view of the law.

Also, let me inform Mr Hussain, that I have gone through these Quranic verses several times. It is not my interpretation of Shariat but that of the government which eventually becomes the foundation of law. So far, the government has also come up with more than one interpretation.

In 1983, the government of Ziaul Haq proposed a law of evidence. The ulema and government spokesmen insisted that the law was based on the correct interpretation of Islam. After a public outcry, the draft law was changed and subsequently promulgated.

If the first interpretation was correct, then the government should have stuck to their position. If not, then surely even Islamized government can make an error on interpretation.

Please also read the decision of Hazoor Baksh by the Federal Shariat Court, First they ruled that stoning to death was un-Islamic. On review, after the removal of the chief justice and elevation of two other people on the bench, who appeared as jurist consults, in the original petition, the decision was overturned.

It is easy to silence people by climbing on the pedestal of religion, but people can see through such tactics.

ASMA JAHANGIR

Lahore

RE tahmed #379

Thank you very much for your insight about Syed Moudoodi, his work and his forefathers.I am sure you feel much better about yourself after your bukwas.You must suffer from low self esteem.If you had met Moudoodi or read anything about him you would have notice he not did look like a bhungi like you.Moudood is a place in Afghanistan where his forefathers migrated from like so many other Muslims during the Mulim era in Hindutan.This is a man who changed the lives of hundreds of thousand people and changed the into men of character.A man who is master of DALEEL and author of the most read Tafseer of Quran.You are spitting on the moon.let me end this with an old saying ``SAVAN KE AUNDHE TO HURA HE HURA NAZAR AATA HEY``

Mospel:

Your post was very pertinent, but there were a few questions that were raised pertaining to the cultural practices and social issues, I do not think they were well addressed or were addressed at all! Sigalph has raised a very poignant thought that I have been meaning to reply, but could not do so due to time limitations. My apologies to Sigalph! Ras Siddiqui has been doing the job of a journalist - collecting stuff from all the possible news services. Both have been contributing a great deal to this otherwise dull thread. They should be commended!

Take Care

hello friends:)

well...this conversation has gone haywire...to find the correct path again, please see reply # 101. You`ll find all the answers there.

Aurangzeb Haneef

correction: my last post should have referenced Ras`s #393, not 383.

re. Ras #383,

Why should news this surprise anyone? Islam, after all, clearly states that a woman cannot be forced into a marriage without consent. This was hardly a difficult decision for the courts to have reached, as it is easily consistent with Shariah.

From The BBC;
A very important court ruling in Pakistan at:

http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/south_asia/newsid_1133000/1133843.stm

Ras

Re: #391

``---Like I said, it won`t go through the heads of people who don`t want it to go through....``

I already mentioned that i donot have any problems with your beliefs watever it is. Now just doNot impose your own supposed beliefs on others. Read again the first few lines of my previous post.

Its better to give arguments than to present a lame commentary of the oppostie side`s supposed intentions in place of arguments because then there is no point in discussing anything as one side already had msigivings about the other.

``---by the way Jeffrey Lang is a muslim, why do u thing his book is called Struggling to surrender!--``

I didnt know that he is a muslim. Thanks for correcting me. But thats besides the point. I didnt call his watever book anything. He has every right and choice to have watever beliefs like you, like me like everyone else in the world. As, i said earlier.

But islam has problems with that.

Infact the personalities i mentioned before,unlike Zia ul Haq and Qazi Sahib, Mother Teresa and Martin Luther King were not fortunate enough to embrace islam.

To go on further, Even within islam there are deep rooted disagreements on the context of different injunctions that are given in Quran and Hadith. The two foremost sources of islamic doctrine. One example you presented yourself in your last post when you wrote about a rather different (than the classic ones like ghazali)view thats been taken by the modern writers on a quranic verse.

This whole scenario (though i hate to write the whole damn thing again) defies totalistic Islam`s own assertion to be the only and absolute Truth that every human has to accept after Mohammed so as to avoid the divine wrath.

``---and i`d recommend you Muhammad Asad`s book, The Message``

Thanx for recommending me... I would like to see how modern writers are faring in elaborating on a 1400 years old doctrine without defying its Essence in its totality. Though some as you already wrote about had already did.

Peace to all.

Bugger off.

Like I said, it won`t go through the heads of people who don`t want it to go through....

by the way Jeffrey Lang is a muslim, why do u thing his book is called Struggling to surrender!

and i`d recommend you Muhammad Asad`s book, The Message

Wassalam

Raw_Dust #388 Kindly refrain from naming these Godless thugs - Qazi Hussain Ahmed, Zia ul Haq - in the same sentence as common people like us, far less in the same sentence as a selfless individual as Mother Teresa or a non-violent revolutionary as Martin Luther King.

PM #386

But most people on Chowk try to see these phenomenon through religious eyes rather than culture and socio-economic status.

Re #326

---From these observations, many modern writers contend tht verse 2:282 was never meant to be a general stipulation.--

Well... to be very brief i would say its the matter of choice. You buy the interpretation of those so called modern writers, coz they somehow make the whole thing accomodating into the Whole of your creed. Fine, suit yourself.

The only little problem is many muslims (should i say orthodox??) would first like to Contend this interpretation itself. Many classical interpretations would disagree with these mellow interpretations of non-muslim theologians. There are whole lot of references of Imam ghazali you could find in an article published here earlier or just see Molana Mowdoodi`s Purdah.

These conflicts in interpretations show how much Islam is vulnerable in its concept of presenting itself as a truly Universal religion whose professed ideologues (the injunctions given in quran and hadith upon which there is no room for ijmaa) are meant to be undulterated and to be applied in its entirety to every human wherever and whenever he/she existed in space and time after Mohammed whether is he/she be a celebrity like Mother Teresa, Martin Luther King, Qazi Hussain Ahmed, Zia ul Haq etc or of a common type like us.

over and out.

krashid #384 Thanks for explaining. Too bad we dont have any real mullahs on chowk. I guess being on chowk requires some minimum interest in silly things like reading and writing when it is much more fun to yell out one`s opinions before a captive audience (in the mosque or at the wrong end of the loudspeaker) without the indignity of having one`s views challenged.

re. Krashid/KMasihi #377

``Looks like some Masihi are Muslims too:-).

Thrash the Muslims hard.-).

Scum of the world.:-)

From KMasih.``

Krashid bhai, why are you thrashing Muslims. (or is it Masihis?)

re. the Muderer Masihi, I thought you would show a little compassion. After all, like you said to me...

``It is not your fault... We are all products of [our] environment``

Well said my dear KRashid!

(and don`t forget, we are talking here about a man who is `flesh of our flesh, blood of our blood`` , as someone wisely put it not so long ago :-))

re hlahil various

Pal, you have done an excellent job as the Islamic Republic of Pakistan`s ambassador. But, frankly, I think Dr Maleeha Lodhi is better looking.

TAhmed #

Actually it was a bollywood mix. The two similes are:

Deegran Ra Naseehat.

Khud Ra Fazeehat. and

Khud Ko Hawaee

Dosroon Ko Dawai.

krashid #379 ``Maulana supercedes God and takes the job of God, interprets God and is a spokesman of God. So he basically replaces God.``

Please, no jokes. We are serious people here.

``Deegran Ra Dawai.

Khud Ra Hawai.``

I must admit not to catch this one. Could you please explain what this means?

Ali1#380

Good to see so many ex-Jamatis.

Sameer JB, you and me.

Is Ghar Ko Aag Lag Gayi Ghar Ke Chiragh Se.

TAhmed 321 #379

I am sure you are not serious enough to discuss Maulana Mowdudi and his legacy Jamat-e-Islami.

Maulana supercedes God and takes the job of God, interprets God and is a spokesman of God. So he basically replaces God.

And if you see his legacy you will notice.

Deegran Ra Dawai.

Khud Ra Hawai.

HLAHIL #374 ``work of Syed Moudoodi``

Maudoodi may have claimed biological descent from the prophet (``Syed``), but Maoudoodism is the opposite of the spiritual message conveyed by the prophet. Even to claim biological descent from the prophet in an effort to prove you are closer to God is the anti-thesis of Islam. For more on the subject read what the spiritual message, as conveyed at length in the Quran, has to say about the Hypocrites - Maudoodi and his bearded followers (the mullahs, who would impose themselves on us in the name of Islam) fit the description of the Hypocrites like the hand fits the proverbial glove.

PS In this age of DNA testing, I think the Syeds will be revealed to be more like Sri Ram Bahadurs, and the Qureshis to be more like Qanti Lals. No wonder the Quran enjoins upon us to learn more about God`s creation: another Quranic message that is conveniently ignored by Maudoodi and his followers.

RE HLAHIL 374

[``Yes, I did not go to St. joseph`s school but I did go to a university and also did well``]

Good for you. I hope you didnt waste too much time with the Jamiat Tulaba.

[``And,I was not talking about the author`s sisters, it was meant for you.``]

Click on this link to refresh your memory:

http://chowk.com/bin/showr.cgi?f=ahaneef_jan0801&n=20#reply350

You WERE insulting the author. Now be a man and apologize to him.

[``it might hurt you but you should read some of the work of Syed Moudoodi.``]

I was a Jamaatiya in my college during the ``glorious`` era of General Zialul Haq Shaheed sitara-e-bisalat. Although I didnt read his tafseer till much later, I did read his other books then. So whats your point?

[``Please tell me now you know who I am``]

I still think you need to get more education. Read Iqbal and Ali Shariati for starters. And have a Pepsi too.

PS: I don`t plan on responding to your posts unless I see an apology from you to the author.

HLAHIL,

Please dont call my beloved nephew ali a fool. He does his patriotic duty everyday by trashing hindus on Chowk.

Ras Siddiqui #

Looks like some Masihi are Muslims too:-).

Thrash the Muslims hard.-).

Scum of the world.:-)

From KMasih.

Ras #373,

And no one in the busy bazaar stopped that monster? Several people couldn`t stop one man?

Now that makes me sick. What is the world coming to?

HLAHIL # On various posts.

Instead of being angry on people who in their time fought hard to achieve something for themselves and their compatriots in the highly tyrranical periods.

Try to do something positive for your generation and compatriot.

Rather than taking the Hashish of Islam by Mullahs, read newspaper everyday to see what is happening daily around you. How many people are losing their job everyday. How many innocent people are in police custody for Bhutta. How many Haris are in jail to serve their landlord. How many suicides are done out of frustration.

And believe me I am talking about your beloved country in which according to your mentality I was f--ing around for 30 years, when I had to do double job all my life. (And I was in better position than many).

Go and tell this bull sh-it to Army, they might give you a position in their next tout Government. Don`t tell this crap in the garb of a patriot. If you are so patriot go and feed one person daily. God might give you some place in paradize.

for Ali

You are realy a fool

-Just because I do not suscribe to your or the author`s point of view, You assume I am not educated.Yes, I did not go to St. joseph`s school but I did go to a university and also did well.If you had any depth you could have questioned my WISDOM not education.There are lot of UNEDUCATED people who are much wiser than you.

And,I was not talking about the author`s sisters, it was meant for you.You must feel worthless to see so much negative about Pakistan and so hostile.You fit well in the class of KALA AUNGREZ, confused, and wanting to be accepted by the cowd of drawing room LIBERALS .You have lost your hearing and vision and will never see the truth even if it hits you in your face.Get some lessons about logic(Muntak) and it might hurt you but you should read some of the work of Syed Moudoodi.(Please tell me now you know who I am)

From The Nation (Lahore, Pakistan)today:

Please note the name of the person who did this:


Couple murdered in broad daylight

By Our Staff Reporter
LAHORE – A young man and his wife were hacked to death in a busy bazaar by his brother-in-law for marrying against the wishes of their families in Youhanabad, Nishter Colony area here on Saturday.
The gory drama, which was a consequence of a two-year-old love marriage, was witnessed by dozens of people.
According to details, the deceased couple, parents of an infant Nadeem and Rubina, had contracted marriage against the wishes of their families some two years back and left their homes. They moved to Gujranwala. Munir Masih, Rubina’s brother traced them and asked them to join their families. He arranged a Panchaiat to bring his sister back home and to restore relations with her and her husband.
During the Panchaiat Munir Masih pulled out a chopper and attacked both in front of a large gathering. The couple tried to run for their lives. Munir caught Nadeem first and killed him later he caught hold of Rubina and attacked her too, killing her on the spot. He then went to the police station for his arrest.
An eyewitness said that he was furious and had struck the couple with a small chopper. Another witness said Nadeem and Rubina were running senselessly as Munir followed them, but both were caught and chopped. “It was a dreadful scene – the killer butchered both of them,” said a witness, adding his clothes were soaked in human blood.” He said that Rubina was running holding her one-year-old child in her arms who was left alone when she was caught by Munir.
When contacted the area police said that Rubina had eloped with Nadeem some two years back and now they were killed by Rubina’s brother Munir. Police denied that the accused (Munir) had come to the police station and for his arrest.
Nishter Colony police have registered a case. Meanwhile, both the bodies were removed to the city morgue for autopsy.

RE HLAHIL # 368

[``The last word used in your posting says a lot about you.I am sure you use f word when you want to sound intelligent.``]

Nah..I use the f word to get the message across to people like you and the message did get across in that you didn`t make presumptions about my sisters like you did about the author`s sisters in your earlier posting.

[``Pakistan has more good people than bad people.``]

When you grow up and get some good education you will realize that (a) good and bad are relative and (b) you need not be a bad person to commit a wrong, just being ignorant is enough.

[``It (Pakistan) is going to get better, I am hopeful of that.``]

Me too. It can`t get any worse pal.

[``Thank god you are not in Pakistan. Less trash to get rid off.

Pakistan Zindabad``]

Please keep us posted on all that you do for the country other than raising slogans.

Finally, I will leave you with this:

-Is it fair on your part to make presumptions and insulting remarks about Aurangzeb Haneef`s sisters just because you disagree with what he has written here?

-Why do girls who drink Pepsi and eat burgers qualify as ``bad`` in your view? I am intrigued.

Solitude and others...

This is quite fascinating...

http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/99jan/koran.htm

excerpt:

[Another scholar with a wide readership who is committed to re-examining the Koran is Mohammed Arkoun, the Algerian professor at the University of Paris. Arkoun argued in Lectures du Coran (1982), for example, that ``it is time [for Islam] to assume, along with all of the great cultural traditions, the modern risks of scientific knowledge,`` and suggested that ``the problem of the divine authenticity of the Koran can serve to reactivate Islamic thought and engage it in the major debates of our age.`` Arkoun regrets the fact that most Muslims are unaware that a different conception of the Koran exists within their own historical tradition. What a re-examination of Islamic history offers Muslims, Arkoun and others argue, is an opportunity to challenge the Muslim orthodoxy from within, rather than having to rely on ``hostile`` outside sources. Arkoun, Abu Zaid, and others hope that this challenge might ultimately lead to nothing less than an Islamic renaissance.]

shankar #369

``Good point. Why single out Pakistani men as villans? These things happen in every country. Male chauvinism & testesterone is not unique of Pakistan.``

When the problem is addressed, say, in the US, they naturally `single out` US males (chauvinists and otherwise:)) as sujects for consideration-- not Pakistani males. I suspect that in trying to understand the roots of the problem, they would consider economic, psychological (incl. biological) and sociological fators (incl. religious background.) In the US, this would mean assessing the possible relationship between Christian beliefs and these actions... Hinduism and Islam would be of little relevance there, I suspect). The reverence shown to religon is not reason enough to skirt the issue.

rgds,

PM

HLAHIL

#368

Good point. Why single out Pakistani men as villans? These things happen in every country. Male chauvinism & testesterone is not unique of Pakistan.

Zahra #363 I am glad you appreciated my earlier post. While attention is generally directed towards greed and violence and fanaticism in Pakistan, the fact is that there are many more people who are quietly contributing one way or another to that country. And that is why I have faith that despite the worst the thugs (politicians, landlords, bureaucrats, Islamic fundamentalists, and plain, vanilla crooks) can do, Pakistanis will one day overcome their troubles. I have, as you mentioned, had the chance to travel around a bit (in connection with my job and for pleasure). On PIA flights, I have almost always run into some acquaintence - once, the gentleman sitting next to me turned out to be an old roommate.

Re Ali1

The last word used in your posting says a lot about you.I am sure you use f word when you want to sound intelligent.At the expense of repeating myself, let me say this again, Pakistan is not a perfect country but what is being asked to believe is that marital rape is common in Pakistan, is simply not true.Pakistan has more good people than bad people.It is going to get better, I am hopeful of that.

You might have problem understanding what i am saying because i am not speaking your language which i know how to.

Thank god you are not in Pakistan. Less trash to

to get rid off.

Pakistan Zindabad

Siagalph 235 #354

There were many good points of Shah`s Iran. Foremost among them was land reform.

But in later times, the middle class movement in many forms like Tudeh Party, Party of Mehdi Bazargan, Khalq, Mujahideen and Fidayeen both and Mullah party etc brought out the revolution.

Before the revolution women were more liberated in the sense that they could wear whatever they can. But the social disparity was extreme. And rule of Savak was notorious.

The revolution brought by many was hijacked by Khomeini. And he imposed his version of things. There are some good points and bad points. My wife was rebuffed because she had a few hairs outside head scarf. But at the same time there was much safety in mobility.

Moreover the regime being not very popular and not supported by any foreign power had to do something concrete to keep the people in check. Since Tehran constitutes 20% of Iran population everybody in power keeps Tehrani people happy, but they have done a remarkable job for village people also (which is their main support base).

Bina #357

Is your question real regarding which Pakistan he is talking about.

It was in all newspapers of Pakistan.

When the poor women were paraded naked in Chowk in retaliation by the powerful of area. And I am pretty sure after Mukh Mukha they would be scot free.

Some incidences are stuck to the minds of Pakistanis, like Bushra Zaidi case and Bahawalpur case.

A very penetrating article that exposes myths based on ignorance and arrogance of a self-centered husband. The attitude of a husband indulging in the Martial Rape is that wife is a property to be used for his sexual pleasures as he pleases, wife doesn`t deserve respect and she has no legal recourse even if she chooses to seek a legal remedy.

In a strage way a husband resorting to the Martial Rape is exposing his emotional inadequacies for love making and short comings such as such as sexual, emotional, financial, cultural, etc. to please his wife/partner.

Those who defende such behavior fail to understand the differance between love making and animal lust.

TAhmed(Post 327):

The following was a very nice post!

``They become better educated by seeing the world and meeting people from other parts of the world and seeing that they are human beings like us. And
thus they become more open-minded. They then contribute in various ways - foreign exchange remittances; foreign idea remittances (less obvious, but more powerful); donations to NGO schools and health clinics; bringing in
foreign direct investments; promoting peace in the sub-continent. The ``brain drain`` that people feared about becomes a ``brain gain``. And there is fertile ground in Pakistan for all this, since expatriate Pakistanis have been appreciated and their views listened to (although not necessarily acted on)by every government in Pakistan.``

As a teenager, I used to have the same question, when I`d see all my cousins taking an uraa`n for their higher studies and many uncles settled abroad for decades. Before I left for mine, I realized that there`s a stage when one feels like taking an uraa`n and coming out of ones comfort zone. In young women`s case, it becomes a little harder for the parents to accept the concept the way they would do for their sons. I guess times are changing now, but haven`t that much.

On a different note, you sound to be a well traveled person. I would love to exchange notes on that aspect. Personally, I`ve hated traveling while I was growing up -- detested airports, train stations and bus stations. [I guess due to the parting scenes -- tears and the gloomy atmosphere] When I decided to take my uraa`n, I had to let go of that dislike -- an interesting transition. In fact, it became a craze! Mainly, due to the people!!It`s a great learning experience and the younger one is the better it is. Most of my senior and married colleagues hated/hate it. On each of my travels, I used to pray very wholeheartedly, ``Allah Taa`la, please
have someone from a different country /culture /race seated next to me.`` Very
surprisingly, I was always heard. Being an impatient and slightly impulsive youth, I developed[kind of] good listening skills while coversing with other travelers. Now, I have become a little careful for what I ask when I pray :-) In fact, very careful! Besides that, I am also not overzealous about taking any adventurous trips - clear cut routes are preferable. I guess, that is a major change, I`ve encountered with the passing of 20s and just
stepping into 30s.

Going back to your succinct note: I have also had few relatives who`ve gone back to assist the government. One of them is in his late 60s/early 70s, adamant to spend time in Pakistan on various economic development projects for at least 6 - 7 months every year. His family is settled in DC for decades and would not consider taking that plunge as often as he would - but he still goes ahead with his passion. This is just one example. There are quite a few who contribute far more effectively than one can imagine - even being away from home.

Later,

Farangi Kush:

Ever occur to you that the valid and sometimes very penetrative observations you make (as on the rich but alas neglected eastern literature) are completely undermined by your fatuous rallying call?

You say: ``My stance on many issues,as on this one,is that MOST of our decent well meaning activists make it an issue ONLY once it becomes a fad elsewhere...``

How about relacing `it becomes a fad` with `awareness of it is raised`? Or are you suggesting that there is nothing to learn from the West at all? That wife-battering and -subjugation in the Eastern cultures was ably addressed and remedied in times gone by? Or perhaps you would have us believe that such occurences of domestic violence in our culture were never really widespread enough to merit `intervention`-- that these vices are as all others, products of Western influence.

HLAHIL:#350

Please understand that we are talking about VIOLENCE here.There is no way one could covertly or overtly support it.

If the pain & cry is coming from the victims themselves it must be heard,listened to,addressed and resolved.We as muslims just cannot muffle the sobs and admonish the injured for bawling in public.

My stance on many issues,as on this one,is that MOST of our decent well meaning activists make it an issue ONLY once it becomes a fad elsewhere.This TRANSPLANTED intellecualism is what I abhor & resent.May be I should be less harsh in my judgement because many of such kind are the product of an education system which has robbed them of their ability to think and only churns out robots looking for jobs,assignments & volunteerism ONLY in a certain cultural setting.

Allama Rashid-ul-Khairi and A.R.Khathoon AND Shaistha Ikramullah are names which could be a beacon to anyone living in the dark ages of present day west or east(yes we do live in different TIME zones within the same geographic location).Now,that because of a very sinister agenda most of such kind have been led to loathe their own rich literature & pioneerism,they are not knowledgeable enough to admit their own ignorance.

The good news for you is that,for the very reason Pakistanis(& Indians) only acknowledge & follow that which has been established & accepted by the west,the young muslim & muslimas are the biggest driving force in the west.The number of conversions taking place & mostly through self-enquiry is al-hamdullilah;and mostly among the learned,celebity,priestly and the well-off class--the ones emulated.The Ba Ba Blacksheep are aghast at seeing the rug being pulled out from under their feet.The farangi-fossils in their forties & fifties are stupefied.

``Boo e Aadam zaad aayee sey kahaan sey nagahaan?

Daiv is jungle kay sunnnatay mein hain``.

__________________________________________________A shair for your moniker:

``Voh zehr bhurra hai kay sulagthee hai suraahi

Hurr kaasa e maiy,zehr e HLAHIL sey sivaa hai``.

__________________________________________________

wassalaam

RE # 350 LAHIL

Powerful piece of writing. You come across as a very intelligent and enligntened person.

[``FARAGIKUSH! where have you been, man``]

Moulana Farangi Kush is preparing to lead his 3 million followers to Islamabad from his ancestral village of Dhoke Khotianwala in Chakwal.

In Islamabad, he will stick the jhanda of Islam in Gen. Mushy`s fat bottom, burn the video and music shops and smash all the television sets. He will take those ``burger eating/pepsi drinking`` girls away from their zandeeq and murtid parents and distribute them among his followers!

Take care man, and please keep on writing. People like you are the future of Pakistan, which I am afraid is no different from you.....fcuked.

re. fairdinkum #352

Thought you might like that, mate!

``But PM, how did you know that I ......... ? :)``

you what?? O bhai, kya shaadi shuda loago ko hum `singull` paagalo jesay aise aaltoo faaltoo falsafiya pe dimagh laRane ke liye time hoga, kya?!? tahmed bhai se zara poochyey to sahiN... kya unn ko khula ka khatra to nahiN hai?

:)

RSaxena:

``What is dangerous is when people seek to impose their moral judgements on other`s.``

Agreed. But how can anything SAID on this cyber medium (or, for that matter, said anywhere) be construed as an imposition on others` values?

HLAHIL:

And which Pakistan were you sitting in where women in Bahawalpur were stripped and made to walk naked down the street? Women may not be made to lap-dance in this country (then why are there still mujras?) but we are not treated with the respect we deserve.

Bina

HLAHIL:

And which Pakistan were you sitting in where women in Bahawalpur were stripped and made to walk naked down the street? Women may not be made to lap-dance in this country (then why are there still mujras?) but we are not treated with the respect we deserve.

Bina

PM #349

Excellent, excellent piece of writing! Loved it! Especially the poem, and those penetrating set of questions.... well, to be honest, I loved the whole thing!

But PM, how did you know that I ......... ? :)

re krashid

``Even for this poor command of English ...I am indebted to the books and literature.``

Exactly my thoughts about Urdu. At least you can easily indulge in English books and literature. I cannot even say that about me and Urdu. You are the fortunate one, my friend. But I try and perservere. Some day...

I do take exception about your sentiments on the late Shah of Iran. His replacement by the ayatollahs was the classic example of the old saying that `in revolutions, what replaces bad is often worse.`

Since we are on the board dealing with women, I can only point out the record of Shah`s Iran and Khomeini`s Iran vis-a-vis women: If Islam finds it manifestation in flogging women for wearing lipstick and doing `virginity` tests, God help all those who claim to be adherents thereof.

Fuzair #324

I don`t accept your logic.

Even if Sunnis don`t accept some philosophies of Shia,s, but we have to learn something from them.

For example, I don`t agree with the philosophy of Shia Islam regarding Imamat seeing the history of Imam Mehdi and Ismaeli Aga Khan. The same with bashing of companions of prophets.

But we have also to see Shia philosophy in the light of persecution throughout centuries and their tactics for survival.

But after the Iranian revolution, there have been many developments in Shia philosophy. Foremost among them `Tehrik-e-Rubobiat`` more near to Tawheed and questioning the divine status for Imam. Moreover many things common in Islam like believe in One God etc plus the revolutionary spirit of Shia Islam. Also Sunni Islam has been a middle man between public at large and Rulers and Sunni Ulema playing that role for their advantage. While Shia Islam at least in Iran now has been a people`s revolution against the tyrant Shah.

I think even if not accepting everything, we have a lot to learn from them.

Siagalph 235#

As you said my English.

Even for this poor command of English (And that is true compared to Urdu) I am indebted to the books and literature.

Rest you can understand what I mean.

Re: PM

``But then, you working on a supposedly universal ethic of your own here -- that is, that it is somehow wrong to `go beyond expressing what is ``right``and ``wrong```-- that it is wrong to pass moral judgement? Isn`t this in itself a kind of moral judgement?``

The act of passing moral judgement on issues other than murder, theft, etc. by itself is not wrong. It`s akin to thinking a dirty thought..who cares if it`s just a thought. What is dangerous is when people seek to impose their moral judgements on other`s. Fortunately, most of us live in societies in the West where people are not allowed to impose their moral judgements on other`s (to some extent they are, but it`s much better than elsewhere).

Re Marital Rape

I must have lived in a different Pakistan where women are treated with utmost respect and protective care. In Pakistan you will not find women lap dancing like North America, your MECCA, and you think there are no crime against women other than in Pakistan.Your article has no basis to declare that marital rape is common in Pakistan.All I can see is a blind hatred and typical western view based on some bleeding heart liberal trash.

I can imagine you growing up in a household in gulberg with four older sisters who did shopping in the Liberty Market drank Pepsi and ate burgers.Let me tell you that Pkistan is full of good people and I beg you, please do not ever go to Pakistan.I agree that no society is crimefree and Pakistan is no execption.I can very well see where you are coming from and it does not bother me at all to see the pearls of wisdom you have included in your article.Pakistan is going through a cleansing process and in the end people like you will end up where you belong.Remember Iran.

A reminder to FARAGIKUSH! where have you been, man.I have not seen in your usual living colours.

fairdinkum,

you suggested a change of topic. here`s something I thought you`d find interesting.

Zehra, (if you`re around) you`ll LOVE this!

http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2000/10/berkowitz.htm

Wooed by Freedom?--- Why the young distrust love and fear commitment

later,

PM

rsaxena #345,

Give me a break! I`m not one to mince words about something I feel strongly about. I can`t be as diplomatically articulate as Sadna or as ``worldly`` as our Zahra baji.

So if I pass judgment, what`s it to you? I`m not God you know.

As far as Solitude is concerned:

``he is urging people to free themselves of religious imprisonment to allow free choice for themselves and others.``

Urging is an understatement. The guy is a walking ``I hate Islam`` banner. Someone on this board said and I agree strongly, that being so fanatic about hating religion is a religion in itself.

On the one hand, he (and you) are talking about free choice, and on the other hand you want the choice of practicing religion to end. That does not make sense. There are people who CHOOSE to follow religion peacefully, spiritually, with no harm intended to others. Why does that irk you so?

``(btw, I don`t think he`s my friend.)``

Don`t worry, there`s a light at the end of the tunnel. You guys will get together some day :)

Don`t lose hope.

Dear fairdinkum,

Just finished reading the article. Thanks. Quite interesting, though not without what IMO are lame Christian apologetics.

Still, there is much in it to ponder on, imbibe and learn from. Will re-read and then look forward to exchanging thoughts with you.

Mail me at postmatser@yahoo.com if u`d like. (note the spelling)

Later,

P.

RSaxena:

you say (ok, not to me, but I Love butting in :))

``People most certainly are entitled to their opinions. But you often go beyond expressing dislike and declare what is universally ``right`` and ``wrong.`` For example, I may disagree with the idea of using cocaine but I won`t pass moral judgements on people who do so.``

But then, you working on a supposedly universal ethic of your own here -- that is, that it is somehow wrong to `go beyond expressing what is ``right``and ``wrong```-- that it is wrong to pass moral judgement? Isn`t this in itself a kind of moral judgement? (Not that I`m suggesting you`re calling for punitive actions or anything... just pointing out that there are value judgements inherent even in the supposedly neutral stance of value relativists. I have yet to come across a true skeptic in real life. Face it... we`re all making some value judgements all the time. The best we can do is not step on others` toes doing so.)

regards,

PM

Re: scout

``Aren`t people entitled to an opinion. I never told anyone to stop what they`re doing. Just expressed my dislike for it.``

People most certainly are entitled to their opinions. But you often go beyond expressing dislike and declare what is universally ``right`` and ``wrong.`` For example, I may disagree with the idea of using cocaine but I won`t pass moral judgements on people who do so.

``By the way, isn`t your friend Solitude trying to change people`s choices by his personal definition of religion?``

Quite the contrary...he is urging people to free themselves of religious imprisonment to allow free choice for themselves and others. (btw, I don`t think he`s my friend.)

``You are welcome to call me conservative. I don`t consider it an insult. We just look at things differently.``

I don`t mean it as an insult at all.

re krashid #296

I rechecked, my verses come from the Deewan as well. That said, I am told that there were some minor changes made when the Diwan went into successive editions. I was hoping that Zahra would clear this up. I am no infallible authority on Mirza sahib.

You wonder about, what you call, my grasp of Urdu(there are not many times but this is one that I wish you were right). How about I wonder about your command of English? Then we`d be even.

Count your blessings pal, you probably grew up speaking and living Urdu.

Cheers.

re. Solitude #331

``Someday - I will. You should realized I cannot post everything here but I can post things upon demand.``

On demand??? So consider this a demand (or polite request, if you will) to support your claim. I`ll help you, if you`d like (just so no one thinks I`ve turned a 180 a la Umer). The worst you can point out in the life of Muhammed would, I suspect, be his reported acquiesence in the slaying of the defenceless poets. Assuming those traditions are true, does that make him evil?? Ummm... I don`t know... in the context of the times and situation... teething movement and all.. well.. I`m really not sure. We can`t place ourselves in the those times too easily. Would you call Attaturk an evil man? Caesar?

Remember, these men were much more ruthless with their enemies than Muhammed could ever be accussed of being.

And what do you say for man who claimed that `the ink of the scholar is worth the blood of a thousand (?) jehadis`?

My only suggestion to you is that you try and bring some measure of balance to your assessment. If for no other reason, because somewhere along the path of trying to expose gross misrepresentations and hypocrisies, you seem to have lost that valuable element of disinterestedness/objectivity.

`` Give me a break, I am up against 1400 years and millions of people.``

Do you HAVE to see yourself as being up agianst the weight of history and half the world? Why don`t you try focusing on simply being FOR the truth -- disintrestedly! If it makes you feel any better, you`ll probably still find a lot to rail against Islam and Muslims. Only, it will hopefully not be burdened with the terrible prejudice it currently has IMO.

``Those who are interested in information can go and find out for themselves. I intend to share what I know on my own schedule.``

O C`mon... who`re u kidding?? `Only what you know`?? Why do I have a hard time believing that? Are you keeping some of what you `know` from yourself too, maybe? Stuff that might upset YOUR conceptual applecart?

Take care buddy. And a few deep breaths before you sit down to write again.

best rgds,

PM

Screw the ceasefire (one doesn`t negotiate with terrorists)....bring in some Israeli anti-terrorism expertise and technology and fumigate these Jehadis.

From ABC News:

{{``What is particularly surprising and distressing is the fact that the leadership of Pakistan continues to do nothing to restrain these terrorist organisations which operate from Pakistani soil, even as it (Pakistan) professes its eagerness to resume talks with India,`` Press Trust of India (PTI) quoted Vajpayee as saying. Speculation has been mounting over whether the government will again extend the truce which is due to end on Republic Day, January 26. Kashmir Chief Minister Farooq Abdullah said earlier on Thursday the killing of innocent people during the ceasefire would affect any decision on the truce. ``The killing of innocent people has not stopped and infiltration has also been reported during the ceasefire period,`` the PTI quoted Abdullah as saying. ``They (the government) are going to review the whole thing, they will take everything into consideration and then decide on the ceasefire,`` he told reporters after a meeting with Vajpayee. On Wednesday, 12 people were killed and dozens wounded when a suicide squad tried to storm the high-security Srinagar airport. }}

yme #325

``it seems like even the die-hard rationalists are softening up and starting to rein in old sol.come on guy`s whats wrong with calling a spade a spade``

If I may be counted among your `die-hard rationalists` (a label I`m not totally comfortable with actually), then you should rest assured... I have no intention to ask folks to stop calling a spade a spade. I will still rail against irresponsible apologetics. But there is a world of a difference between telling it like it is and telling half the story only, with a decided bias at that.

Solitude still has a lot to `offer` the apologists ... stuff they should be more aware of if they are realistically going to take on the extremists threat. I still contend that many of them content themselves too much by simply side stepping some problematic questions (cf Fuzair`s posts) and with simplistic solutions. They would do well to treat Solitude as devil`s advocate. Metaphorically, for a change.

As for my `softening`, well there had to be something to neutralize the excessive `hardness` of Solitude`s stance, nO?

rgds,

PM

rsaxena #329, ``You aren`t suggesting that you are ``liberal minded,`` are you?``

If your definition of liberalness is drinking, screwing around, and exposing your body then by your definition, I`m ultra conservative. I`m not ashamed to admit it. My conversation with tahmed was about the people who are liberal minded when it comes to religion, education, and women`s rights.

``You often oppose people`s right to make choices about their lifestyle on the basis of your personal definition of morality..``

Aren`t people entitled to an opinion. I never told anyone to stop what they`re doing. Just expressed my dislike for it. By the way, isn`t your friend Solitude trying to change people`s choices by his personal definition of religion?

And I bet he`s a liberal in your mind rite?

``that`s hardly being liberal minded.``

Once again, you`re entitled to think of me however you wish. You are welcome to call me conservative. I don`t consider it an insult. We just look at things differently.

Vaneeza #324

Good explanation there. Thank you. Your last paragraph jsutifying the half-inheritance of women made good sense. It also brought out the need to see many (not necessarily all) of the quranic injunctions in their socio-historical context. IMO anyay.

You say: ``I`m not sure whether a mother has a right on the son`s property but I think she does.``

I think each parent is entitled to one-eighth of a son`s legacy. I could be wrong.

regards,

PM

ali1:#334

Thanks a lot!

Yours is definitley PAHLA NUMBER.

Remember Chirkeen`s second misr`a: ``Phull Phulla kurr........lushkar e kuffaar nay``..?

``Qatl ul moozee,qubl al eeza``

__________________________________________________

wassalaam

RSaxena:

As a disciple, it must be painfully hard to hear any comments about your teacher. Take it easy!!
Maulana(knowledgeable man)is quite capable of handling his matters on his own. Don`t tell me that you are tasked to be his spokesman ?
Good for you, bad for him!

Take Care
``Mr. Spokesman``

Solitude #331 ``Give me a break, I am up against 1400 years and millions of people.``

Perhaps we have an inflated sense of our self-importance, n`est pas?

Re: Zahra

``Maulana Solitude ``

He is the last person on Chowk I`d consider a Maulana. Also, unlike many of us, I don`t think he personalizes his arguments...you shouldn`t either.

RE: # 325

[``The problem on chowk imo is there are no real so called `ulema` here....``]

....and also that there are no real so called atheists or rationalists here, just a few sick and hate-filled people suffering from oral hemorrhoids. I`ll give two examples:

- chowk`s resident religion expert thinks that Al Baqarah 223 allows and encourages anal rape of one`s wife (# 19) and the other ``hardcore`` (aarrghhh) rationalist chimpanzees applaud him for ``calling a spade a spade`` (# 325).

- resident chowk linguist/anthropologist does a Google search on ``Rajput`` and pastes the results here and the pathetic rationalist monkees praise his scholarly efforts in unison.

[``Therefore lets keep pushing the danda``]

The danda is up where it belongs buddy. For example, check Tasleema Nasreen`s booty if there are any doubts.

``Someday - I will. You should realized I cannot post everything here but I can post things upon demand. Give me a break, I am up against 1400 years and millions of people. Those who are interested in information can go and find out for themselves. I intend to share what I know on my own schedule``

Yeh, Hooyee Naa Baat! Well that was sweet!

PM:
Maulana Solitude is a very busy preacher, please do not question him unnecessarily. Sunna` Naheen Keh Unho-nae`n Kyaa Furmayaa` Hae`? Aap Kee Buhat Meherbani Hogi Agur Aaap Upnae` Savalaat Kaa Tokraa Upnae` Paas Rukhaen Aur Unn Ko Javab Daenae` Kae` Kusht Sae Door Rukhaen` :-)

Probably, this was the shortest response I have ever seen from Maulana`s Keyboard :-)

Fuzair #323 ``I am not the first and won`t be the last to say that the true tragedy of Islam is that it has had no successful reformation to bring it in line with modern life. ``

No religion went thru Reformation like Christianity did. And the Christian Reformation was part of a broader European Renaissance. External factors (notably the much maligned Islamic World) were a major factor in the European Renaissance (including the provision of the three-sail technology that enabled Europeans to build ocean-faring vessels that carried them to the shores of India, Africa, America and sparked the spirit of adventure that lives to this day in the West). My point is: Simply dumping on Islam is a cop out. What we need is a broader social change that comes through new ideas, new technologies - the whole caboodle. We will then have a paradigm shift, and the same Islam that is seen as a part of the problem by so many people will become a part of the solution.

``You mention that `Muhammed was an evil man`... But it seems that often enough you neglect to bring any sort of historical perrspective to bear on the the matter`` - PM

Someday - I will. You should realized I cannot post everything here but I can post things upon demand. Give me a break, I am up against 1400 years and millions of people. Those who are interested in information can go and find out for themselves. I intend to share what I know on my own schedule.

PM #318 OK, bring out the old peace pipe, and lets move on.

you write ``On the more serious side... can you explain how/why 5% of the population can be allowed to enforce their will upon 95%? What am I missing here?``

At the risk of being sucked into a ``serious discussion``, here is my response: what you are missing is the military. Having failed to win elections, the mullahs have been trying to gain influence in the military. They have not had much success so far, thanks to the strength of Pakistani military tradition. But given where we are today - the mullahs are armed, getting money from the middle east and inspiration from Afghanistan and Kashmir - this danger cannot be discounted. I think the mullahs smell blood, and the only thing holding them back is their own internal bickering and lack of public support.

You write ``And also, you and scout keep suggesting that there is no room for Shariah in Islam... that it is a private matter between an individual and God.. Are you suggesting that there are no laws in Islam other than those governing personal/private conduct?``

The Quran makes it clear that there are no intermediaries between man and God. Logic dictates that in such case there is no room for a mullah (or anyone else) to tell another person (let alone an entire society) what the laws of God are. One can argue what the laws of the country should be, and through what process, but without the benefit of claiming that your interpretation of God says in the Quran is better than that of someone else.

While I am on the subject: The Quran says many other things that I never hear about either from the fundamentalists, or from the Islam-bashers: The Quran says that to be close to God you need not be a muslim - you may be a Christian, a Jew, a Sabian (whose beliefs were similar to Hinduism, I understand) and so on as long as you (a) believe in God, (b) the Judgement Day (which I assume means believe in a moral universe where our actions will be judged, and (c) do good works. The Quran says that God did not make man to pray like angels, but to learn about his creation. This clearly means that the idea is for people to persue science and learning, not keep children away from schools (as the Taliban are doing).

scout #317 ``What happens when most of the liberal minded, educated PAkistanis have left the country?``

They become better educated by seeing the world and meeting people from other parts of the world and seeing that they are human beings like us. And thus they become more open-minded. They then contribute in various ways - foreign exchange remittances; foreign idea remittances (less obvious, but more powerful); donations to NGO schools and health clinics; bringing in foreign direct investments; promoting peace in the sub-continent. The ``brain drain`` that people feared about becomes a ``brain gain``. And there is fertile ground in Pakistan for all this, since expatriate Pakistanis have been appreciated and their views listened to (although not necessarily acted on) by every government in Pakistan.

Hello y`all chowk folks!!!

Very interssting discussion. Sorry had to jump in at this late juncture,it seems like even the die-hard rationalists are softening up and starting to rein in old sol.come on guy`s whats wrong with calling a spade a spade.

The problem on chowk imo is there are no real so called `ulema` here,most islamists are soft core liberals with their knowedge base being what they were taught about islam by their middle class parents. It is hard to be angry with them if they are basically asking for mercy,to just be a little bit kinder to islam, its founder and followers and thats fine and dandy but if you do that you stop the learning process. Imagine if every one hugged and kissed and madeup this eastern bazaar would become a sterilized mall.UGH.

Therefore lets keep pushing the danda .

Sweet dreams!

Forget addressing the problems of the poor and the women, Indian courts have more important issues to address.

``CHANDIGARH, India, Jan 18 (Reuters) - A court in the northern Indian state of Punjab has banned the traditional sport of bull cart racing on complaints the beasts are cruelly treated, an animal rights group said on Thursday. ``We managed to get a court order against the event,`` Payal Sodi, head of People for Animals (PFA) in the state capital of Chandigarh said. Sodi said objects were sometimes inserted into the anus of beasts to make them run faster. PFA, headed by Minister for Social Justice and Empowerment Maneka Gandhi, had long sought a ban on the most popular sport of the ``rural Olympics.`` The rural Olympics are held every year at the northeastern town of Kila Raipur in Ludhiana district of Punjab. Ludhiana Deputy Commissioner S.K. Sandhu also accused race participants of drugging and flogging bulls``

Re: scout

``What happens when most of the liberal minded, educated PAkistanis have left the country? Exactly what we`re seeing happening in Pakistan right now. There`s no one to blame but ourselves.``

You aren`t suggesting that you are ``liberal minded,`` are you? You often oppose people`s right to make choices about their lifestyle on the basis of your personal definition of morality...that`s hardly being liberal minded.

Reply #: 320

Raw_Dust

1) A woman`s testimony is not equal to man

2) A woman is not entitled to the equal share in the inheritance laws.

These two above mentioned features of ISLAM shows the crass Gender Inequality that Islam engenders.

I pointed it out in my last two posts, but surprisingly the Educated lot chose to remain oblivious ...plz come forward and negate it...

I`m sure this isn`t going to go through the heads of people who don`t want it go through their heads but i`m offering my explanation anyway :) According to Jeffery Lang in his book,Struggling to Surrender he explains it as below.

Firstly, the verse in the Quran (2:282) which states this two women equal to one man`s testimony thing is mainly dealing with protection of business agreements and the avoidance of later contention. Facing widespread illiteracy, Islam set strict standards to guarantee the terms of a business contract and, in so doing, reduced the possibility of deception and misunderstanding that often, atleast in the past, would have been settled violently. At that time, and for centuries to come in almost all societies, women were in general less educated and less proficient in financial dealings then men, and thus the Quran required the witness of a man or two women.

In eight places, the Quran has instructions relating to the giving of testimony. Two of thse refer only to swearing an oath and not to testimony in general, and the other six refer to testimony (2:282, 4:6, 4:15, 5:109, 5:110, 24:4, 24:6-9, 65:2). In all cases except 2:282, no specification on the sex of the witness is made. There are many examples in the hadith collections where women`s testimony is accepted without corroboration and, sometimes, where the testimony of a single female witness overrides the witness of several men (he`s given reference to a book, Role of Women in society by Fazlur Rahman).

Additionally, many of Muhammed (pbuh)`s sayings are accepted in the canonical collections as authentic in spite of the fact that they have only a single woman as their source. From these observations, many modern writers contend tht verse 2:282 was never meant to be a general stipulation.

He goes on for a page and a half further explaining this verse.

Now, for the inheritance laws thing...well from what I know, and I am still learning...women, for example me, I have a RIGHT on everything my dad owns or any property he owns for that matter and I also have a right on my husband`s property/wealth. BUt it is NOT vice versa. Thus when Islam proportions a bigger share to the man compared to the woman, its because his wife, daughters, sons all have a right on his property and thus he has to share it with them, however once I`m given my share, I don`t gotta share it with no one :) I`m not sure whether a mother has a right on the son`s property but I think she does.

Anyway I hope this justifies the `crass inequality in ISLAM`

Peace

Re: Some of Fairdinkum`s posts.

Sorry to disappoint you but Abdol Karim Soroush is another example of political Islam`s abillity to marginalize reformers. He is lucky to be still alive in Iran, a fact that I attribute to his not being political and the regime`s fear of inciting the masses to outright revolt if they actually execute him. Frankly, given Iran`s human rights record, I am amazed at the regime`s tolerance.

In any case, Soroush is a Shia and while Iranian Shiism is not as outre as some other brands (e.g., Ismaili or Druse), no Sunni is going to look at Soroush as THEIR Martin Luther.

Incidentally, reforming Christianity was a centuries long and very bloody process. Reformers before Luther, for example Hus, were executed by the Holy Mother Church just as `Islamic` regimes regularly executed `apostates.`

Regards.

Re: Raw_Dust #320

You are of course absolutely correct. In spite of all the drivel put out by the apologists who want to use the Koran as a literal how-to manual for living your life, women (and religous minorities) are treated as second-class citizens at best. However, as I have stopped pointing this out to Solitude, why pick on just Islam? Judaism and Christianity have just as many absurdities. Gems of wisdom such as don`t let women speak in Church, women obey their husbands (and not vice-versa), go down and slaughter all the non-jews, don`t mix meat and dairy, the whole kosher stupidity, etc. etc. etc.
If you want to drag Hinduism into it, we can look at sati or the wife-worshipping-the-husband-as-her-god, etc.

The real difference between Islam and Judaism/Christianity is that the latter have been `reformed` to make them compatible with modern life while Islam is unreformable (why does perfection need to be reformed?). The gates of ijtima were closed centuries ago and all attempts to reopen them have been firmly beaten back.

I am not the first and won`t be the last to say that the true tragedy of Islam is that it has had no successful reformation to bring it in line with modern life. The resident idiots on this board will of course go ballistic over this but who cares?

Regards.

lakhani #313

Dear Lakhani,

Your statement:

“I don`t want to generalize, but working at a battered women`s shelter gives me a little bit of confidence to say that most of these victims come from low socio-economic status. Sometimes I think that they have accepted the abuse as part of life and if we try to help, we would only be intruding. Maybe there is no solution ...maybe there is no problem.”

Thanks for you input. And welcome to interactive chowk! Your above statement, represents feelings of many people who have worked in some capacity with battered/tortured people. Acceptance of abuse by battered/tortured people as “normal” day to day business is not very uncommon – even in western societies… its more to do with human psychology than socio-economic status of abused individuals… but the difficulty in reaching such people (who have accepted abuse as part of their lives) is enormous and I can empathize with your frustration. Do you work with battered women in Pakistan? If so, do you guys get any training/guidance on psychological aspects of dealing with this problem?

Your statement:

“Especially in Pakistan, where the Police is so ignorant (and specifically women police), how can this matter be solved? This article may reach a handful of sexually abuse married women but what about the ones who are not literate or resourceful enough to get educated on this matter?”

Lakhani, those are very relevant and yet difficult questions you pose. Current education polices of GOP do no provide any hope for us… we are too busy building our nuclear arsenal to worry about battered/abused women of Pakistan. All I can say is that I join you in expressing frustration and disgust at the total indifference of Pakistani society at the plight of abused Pakistani women.

Solitude (#303)

Further to my post #315...

You accuse all those who cannot quite agree or appreciate your calls to annihilate religion and religious people from the face of the earth in “one hit” in the following statement:

“It is YOUR fault, you chose to give up your reason and you ``submitted`` and ``surrendered`` to Islam - you and many people like you.”

In his same post (just a bit further along) you make the following statement:

“Get rid of Islam and there will be no need of blaming the Mullahs. Things will become much simpler and you will not have to come up with imaginative excuses to justify selfish, social maneuvers(sp?) [Manoeuvres] “

Get rid of Islam? Is this a reasonable/pragmatic/sane statement? Who is being unreasonable here? Have you ever considered that it could be you who has chosen to give up reason?

1) A woman`s testimony is not equal to man

2) A woman is not entitled to the equal share in the inheritance laws.

These two above mentioned features of ISLAM shows the crass Gender Inequality that Islam engenders.

I pointed it out in my last two posts, but surprisingly the Educated lot chose to remain oblivious ...plz come forward and negate it...

Solitude #303

Your post 303 is like Ghazwa Badr.

When you say ``YOU`` you mean Muslim.

But when you say ``US`` you did not say what it means.

An orphan brought up by his mother, then grandfather and at the age of eight adopted by his uncle. A calm, decent guy, known as ``Sadiq`` and ``Ameen`` all his life. When started preaching the message of God at the age of forty, the same people of his family and friends become his enemy, to the point that at the age of 53 years he has to leave his beloved city and people. Let me know if you have any grudge against this person till the age of 53.

In ten years this remarkable man spread the message of God to whole of Arabia and surrounding countries. He came for this mission.

He was a leader, who was not only respected but practically worshipped by his followers save he told them ``Worship`` is not allowed to any one but ``Allah``.

If you say evil. How come a person is good all his life, including 13 years of hardship in the process of propagating his mission, suddenly became evil.

Isolated incidences without background don`t give a correct picture. When Meccah was conquered without bloodshed (and that shows his love for his mission rather than blood-thirsty) and all his enemies were in front of him and afraid of him. He told them ``I say to you the same what Joseph told his brothers``

In another post, I told that I have no intention of defending the indefensible. I meant was our popes who have copyrighted religion. As far as Mohammed PBUH is concerned, he accomplished his mission, people of Islamic faith are most monotheist and less prone to ``Shirk`` (essense of Islam) and he has passed away 1400 years back.

What is evil and good. When I work and get a particular pay and my employer gets the hefty share, future historians might say it is evil. However my employer might be very good for this society.

Since you are coming up with describing Mohammed PBUH as evil (if you had courtesy you could add genius) would you care to discuss the specific incidences where you thought that. May be that might help in clarifying my mind. Because I have read his life history from couple of sources with different version, and I might also come out of darkness into light into which you are brightening yourself.

tahmed (hoping you WILL read this one -- no insults here)

Sheesh, man... why so touchy? first the `blah blah blah` bit got to you, now the play on the moniker. For crying out loud... lighten up! It`s only a moniker! It`s not like I called you a bigot or anything :-)

Seriously, I have no animosity for you, though I grant that that feeling may not be mutual. I think we both got carried away in the heat of the moment and BOTH got unnecassarily personal.

If you want an apology for `blah blah blah` don`t you think you should offer one for `bigot`?



On the more serious side... can you explain how/why 5% of the population can be allowed to enforce their will upon 95%? What am I missing here?

And also, you and scout keep suggesting that there is no room for Shariah in Islam... that it is a private matter between an individual and God.. Are you suggesting that there are no laws in Islam other than those governing personal/private conduct?

rgds,

PM

tahmed321 #315,

What happens when most of the liberal minded, educated PAkistanis have left the country? Exactly what we`re seeing happening in Pakistan right now. There`s no one to blame but ourselves.

We`ve built useless mini-paradises in the West.

PM #309, ``Is it entirely inconceivable that others have been touched by something in the religion in a way quite differnt from your own experience? Could it not be that even under (or over) the fear that DOES exist, ther migh also be a cogzizance of something valuable that keeps some people to their faith?``

Well said. That is exactly what my problem with his arguments is. I`ve seen people brainwashed by Mullahs too, but I`ve also seen people saved by their faith in religion and God.

How and why would you let a person who is happy with his/her faith and isn`t hurting anyone give up their religion?

But I don`t think this point will go into Solitude`s head, it`s like a rubber ball, new ideas just bounce off. He`ll come back at you with more hate filled posts and ignore your questions.

Solitude #303

Dear Shiraz,

First, there is nothing wrong in addressing the person (even if that person is religious) when you write your responses – especially when you quote them. You can also include the reference of the post you are replying to… it helps in keeping track of what is going on and who is saying what in what context.

After carefully reading your post in its entirety, I have come to the conclusion that you don’t intend to enter into dialogue, but lecture us on YOUR understanding of religion. Please understand that your arguments have not compelled me to write this post. Intellectually, I find your arguments absolutely pathetic, and if anything, I feel sorry for your understanding of religion, life, and human existence.

But since you have quoted me in you post, and since I was taught certain moral and ethical values, and etiquettes while being “brainwashed” by my parents (I feel profoundly grateful for that brainwashing now), I consider it impolite not to respond.

Your statement:

“No one said anything abusive about Mohammad, his companions, family or Quran. We are all stating facts. We are taking YOUR verses, YOUR ahadith and YOUR sources and showing you YOUR own ugliness in a mirror. “

Fair enough. I appreciate that. I do realize that I have an ugly face… I am biased, and prejudiced in my understanding of religion/life/human existence. I recognize that. And I know (from my brainwashing days) that I know very little and I must recognize and know my biases. I must strive to learn more from others and enhance my understanding of life and human existence …
Do YOU realize that you have also read Quran, Hadit, Islamic history etc. using YOUR own mind with all the biases/prejudices/shortcomings YOU have accumulated over the years? Like me, your understanding of any particular religion/ideology/issue is also effected by various factors such as culture and language, upbringing, ideological slants in your family, socio-political environment, your intellectual capabilities (or lack of them) to grasp intricacies of complex theological/philosophical/socio-political/scientific matters etc. etc. You are not making enunciations devoid of all the things I just mentioned… unless you are claiming divinity? Or you are incapable of understanding that you are a “human being.”

Your statement:

“Nazism and the KKK was not fought by saying ``KKK and Nazism is a nice ideaology - it is just those people in the hoods who kill blacks who are wrong - it is just those soldiers wearing swastikas who are wrong - if we want to reform Nazi Germany let us not `hurl abuse` at Nazism let us instead JUST say bad things about Hitler`”

This comes from your sheer lack of understanding of religion. When you say GOD, you say WE and when you say WE it encompasses all human beings… Can you appreciate that? Why is Quran essentially addressed to human beings and not Muslims? Your failure to understand the fundamental difference between Nazism or KKK ideologies and religion makes me want to jump from West Gate Bridge in Melbourne.

Your statement:

“EVERYONE including Christianity , the Papacy, the Catholic Church etc. was criticized and should be criticized today.”

Should we also criticize Christ for the Holocaust? Is/was Christ also evil? He did “invent” that pathetic religion called “Christianity” which is (directly or indirectly) responsible for the slaughter of many millions of human beings… This evil religion is still capable of bringing the worst in a man to surface (remember Waco Texas?)… and if women have really suffered under any religion, it is Christianity… remember the witch hunts? So shall we proclaim Christ as an evil being and Christianity an evil religion?

As for Salman Rushdie, I have read his book. It was a pathetic attempt on his part to appease the Post-modernists… I guess he completely misunderstood what post-modern thought is all about… The reaction from Muslims was over zealous… Salman Rushdie has every right to express his views and Muslims have a right to disagree and protest… but violence (in any form) cannot and should not be condoned.

Apart from your valid objection to persecution of people in the name of religion and the mistreatment of minorities in Pakistan – on which I concur with you 100%, rest of your post degenerates into emotional outburst, and name-calling. So I stop here.

scout #305 I bet 95% people in Pakistan also agree with this too. There is a great danger of the 5% lunatic fringe trying to institutionalize their views by making shariah (meaning, at best their illiterate misconceptions about Islam) as the law of the land.

I think we are at a cross-roads today, and it is a time of great danger. I greatly fear for the future of our beloved country and our wonderful people.

PM #304 you write ``My dear tahmed321-0``

I stopped reading your post right here (you may not believe this, of course). Reason: If your sense of humor consists of making fun of people`s internet monikers, then you are truly a moron.

RE: #303 the prozac kid

[``We are all stating facts. We are taking...``]

Who is ``we``??

Kala Kurranta saab is just buffing up his political asylum application. You are all alone fella.

This article was brilliantly written. I am an avid chowk reader but never particpated in discussions up until now. This article, however, reminded me of a book that I read not too long ago about marital rape and much much more and wanted to share it with other readers. It is called, Blasphemy by Tehmina Durrani. For those interested, I highly recommend it.

As far as marital rape is concerned, I believe that it is discussed enough already. We talk about it, we get frustrated at people`s reaction and ignorance and then we forget about it. Especially in Pakistan, where the Police is so ignorant (and specifically women police), how can this matter be solved? This article may reach a handful of sexually abuse married women but what about the ones who are not literate or resourceful enough to get edcuated on this matter? I don`t want to generalize, but working at a battered women`s shelter gives me a little bit of confidence to say that most of these victims come from low socio-economic status. Sometimes I think that they have accepted the abuse as part of life and if we try to help, we would only be intruding. Maybe there is no solution ...maybe there is no problem.

I think that in Pakistan, the government needs to pay special attention to this issue along with many other women`s issues. In my opinion, more than half the problems will be solved just by educating them. And I am not talking about ``Nai Roshni`` education; I am talking about real education where they learn their rights given to them in Islam and by Allah, where they have the sensibility to recognize what`s wrong and unacceptable, and right and acceptable. I guess in order for this to materialise, the Government itself needs to be educated. It may take a while but if this process does not start soon, we may not see positive results ...ever.

re. #303

Sol,

I agree with you to some extent (large extent!) on that the Mullahs are convenient scapegoats (and therefore whipping boys) for the moderates. Every time some extremist activity takes places, the moderates can exonerate themselves by claiming that that is not `real Islam`.

I happen to agree that many of the times, that indeed is true (here`s is where I differ from you). The extremists will act on dictates and pronuouncements from the quran/hadith that IMO were purely situational (as in the case of ``take not the Jews or Christians as your friends`` -- a verse `revealed` when tensions between the Muslims and Jews were running high.

Can we blame them? Most of the time, I think not. Religion, when treated as panacea and backed up with the authority of absolute truth, can do the worst of things to the human psyche (as you know only to well, huh?). We saw it in Christianity, we are perhaps seeing it in Hinduism afer a long time, and we aure as hell are seeing it in Islam nowadays.

So yes, your point about who is to blame is quite valid. Is it the uneducated mullah or the the educated (that is, more exposed to outisde ideas) Muslims? I would not concur with your answer completely, though. Yes, it is people who hide their heads in the sand, who will say ``Yes, we agree that Islam is not to be followed literally``, but when the moment comes, will rather condemn the mullahs from afar than face them (in debate, on national TV, for instance). They fail miserably at the question of why it is that the mullahs, who win zero seats in the elections wield so much REAL power (though the answer shold be easy enough). To the extent that this sort of burying one`s head in the sand takes place, I agree, it is the apologists who are to blame for not seeing the link beteen the common basic philosophy they share with mullahs, and the latter`s actions.

BUT...

Is the baby to be thrown out with the bathwater? You state that Islam is a barbaric religion, and bring forth verses to support your claim. But you present just one side of the picture. Would you disagree on that there are some truly uplifting sayings/ wise pronouncements in the Quran and hadith? That women were given rights that were totally revolutionary in the context of sixth century Arabia? That the `economic policies` of the quran are really quite people-firendly?

But forget the specifics... there is a certain ethos that one may either choose to see or ignore, that comes from a GENERAL following of the quran and sunnah... something that trancends and even negates the more undesireable `particulars` within. Yes, I know, your question will be how do we discern/filter? -- I guess here is where that neeyat thingy comes in. I guess the trick is to have some mechanisms in place that prevent the focusing on particulars when they go against the more enduring, general message/ethos. (I don`t know what sort of mechanism this might be, but I think it will always be problematic as long as the `absolute truth for all time` doctrine stands -- the `tragedy` of Islam, IMO. Foe how do you stand up to the mullahs and say `no, we are NOT going to follow the letter of the Quran, even if it is God`s own irrefutable Word?)

Yes, this is all very subjective. But when dealing with matters so obviously close to people`s hearts, we can/must allow for that. You contend that any defense of Islam is born of fear and brainwashing. Might that not be a little arrogant on your part? Is it entirely inconceivable that others have been touched by something in the religion in a way quite differnt from your own experience? Could it not be that even under (or over) the fear that DOES exist, ther migh also be a cogzizance of something valuable that keeps some people to their faith?

Can you even CONSIDER that possibility?? Or are YOUR experiences so central to your observations that you see nothing wrong with extrapolating them to all adherents of the faith?

You mention that `Muhammed was an evil man`. But you do not support that contention with any evidence. Yes, you will produce verses to show how slaying the enemy was approved of. But it seems that often enough you neglect to bring any sort of historical perrspective to bear on the the matter-- strange for someone whose war cry has often been that Islam is a product of uneducated nomads.

Coming back to the baby and bathwater metaphor....Christendom was very much in the situation that present-day radical Islam is (and btw, I agree fully with your contention that Christianity (post-Christ, that is); not just bad Christains, should be blamed for the Inquisition and Holocaust).

It would seem a more viable (and I might say desirable) stragety to purge the religion of its bad elements rather than call for its total denunciation. In any case, the latter is an unrealistic goal, what with 1/6 of the world`s inhabitants professing their faith in and love for Islam.

But I guess you would first have consider the possibilty that others might see in it something that you don`t. Are you up to even CONSIDERING that, Mr. Shiraz? No one is saying that you will necessarily have to alter your stance. But with so many genuinely good people professing to some sublime, life affirming value in Islam, are you willing to entertain the idea that what they are feeling is not all a derivative of fear?

Hoping you will find in this something to think about.

regards,

PM

Solitude #303, ``Why do you not have the courage to discard the mask of Islam behind which you committ

your crimes ?``

Oh so now every Muslim is a criminal....hahaa

Yeah, I just robbed the 7-11 around the corner. Islam told me to. And before I mugged the Bengali working there, I cited verses from the Quran to justify the crime. Islam told me that too.

Good one. You never cease to amaze/entertain me with your gibberish.

.....solitude is beginning to sound just like those rabid islamists and jesuits and baptists and other assorted disciples of extreme religion ... what happened? od`d on ibn waraq ??.......at some point anti-religion becomes a relgion with its own demonic gods ..... and i thought ole solitude was a fun-loving secular-humanist who could poke fun at people who claim to walk on water and go for heavenly rides without flying off the handle if sombody called Madalyn O`Hair a fat old stupid woman who deserved to be abducted by a UFO..........

....... most of the people i love and respect happen to be fairly religious folk who do not wear their rather silly faith (in my view) on their sleeve or shove it in your face ..... some of them pray five times a day and others, like me, twice a year - but none of them have the gall to ``invite`` innocent bystanders to participate in regimented salat or do their silly dawah thing ...... some of my best friends will leave the ice melting in their scotch while they go pray maghrib, and others will routinely cross themselves when confronted by a rotweiller or a vision of a shaggy shepherd...... and as much as i hate to admit it, i even know some pretty decent hindus whose poor wives slave away in vegetarian kitchens while they gorge theemsleves on rare porterhouses ...... i only hope such people, with a live and let live attitude, can keep our rabid brethren in check ..... and hopefully, over time we will evolve to a point where the pope and qazi hussain are made irrelevant .....

....of course the horrible taliban, and others like them, are a real threat to civilization and mankind, and should be stopped by all means .... however, we do not have to invent another religion with anti-god as god to fight these idiots .....

Re: Solitude

{{The ONLY way is by letting Muslims know that what they are following is unethical, harmful (to themselves and others) and UNHOLY``

``Nazism and the KKK was not fought by saying ``KKK and Nazism is a nice ideaology - it is just those people in the hoods who kill blacks who are wrong - it is just those soldiers wearing swastikas who are wrong - if we want to reform Nazi Germany let us not `hurl abuse` at Nazism let us instead JUST say bad things about Hitler`}}

Excellent point. People never think of it in that way but it makes a lot of sense.

tahmed321, #299, `` Islam is the personal business between the individual and God, there is no room for self-appointed intermediaries like mullahs and shariah courts - this simple fact is made amply clear in the Quran itself.``

I totally agree!

re. #294

My dear tahmed321-0,

I apologize for using `blah blah blah` to express what I felt about your accusatory posts.

After reading your #294, in which you again (count: 3) fail to come up with a single piece of evidence to support your accusations, while you cleverly pretend that I not have addressed the issue of my alleged `intellectual dishonesty` wrt your position on hamidm -- I hereby offer offer to retract those three words (err.. do I have to use them on someone else before I can retract them *wink, wink *?) .

Yes, retract them I must! They were most inappropriate. What I actually meant was...

`yadda, yadda, yadda`.

Now, if you`d be so `intellectually honest` yourself so as to support your accusation of Islam-bashing with some evidence... (This is request #3 or #4, I believe). It`s not so difficult, y`know ... my words are strewn all over these pages.. all u ned to do is (a) cut and (b) paste.

rgds,

PM

``I can’t talk to Muslims if I come out with guns blazing and hurl abuse at Mohammad, his companion, Mohammad’s family, the Quran etc. etc. why is it so hard for people to understand that any change for the better in a religious society like Pakistan has to come from within? Do you think you can stop the perverted Islam of Mullah Omar from spreading into Pakistan by describing Islam as a barbaric religion, which should be condemned? ``

No one said anything abusive about Mohammad, his companions, family or Quran. We are all stating facts. We are taking YOUR verses, YOUR ahadith and YOUR sources and showing you YOUR own ugliness in a mirror. It is the defenders of Islam, the apologetics etc. who are abusing those of us who hold mirrors. On top of that you complain ``oh you are abusing our religion``.

People must be allowed to criticize Islam. Criticize Mullah Omar today but tomorrow there will be some other Bin Ladin , some other dictator , some other rapist, murderer etc. just like the rapists and murderers of the past.

If the lot of human beings who call themselves Muslims is to be bettered then Islam must be exposed for what it truly is - Mohammad should be exposed for what he was : an evil man and a product and reaction to a less evil society.

The ONLY way is by letting Muslims know that what they are following is unethical, harmful (to themselves and others) and UNHOLY. The false shroud of holiness that covers Islam must be removed to expose the ugly decaying structure underneath.

Nazism and the KKK was not fought by saying ``KKK and Nazism is a nice ideaology - it is just those people in the hoods who kill blacks who are wrong - it is just those soldiers wearing swastikas who are wrong - if we want to reform Nazi Germany let us not `hurl abuse` at Nazism let us instead JUST say bad things about Hitler`

Hitler cannot be blamed for EVERYTHING. He was not the commander of children - he was the commander of an entire nation of brainwashed fools who were just as devout christians as he was. EVERYONE including Christianity , the Papacy, the Catholic Church etc. was criticized and should be criticized today. Mullah Omar and Bin Ladin and Saddam Hussain and other marauders are NOT leading children - they are leading a nation of sweet talking murderers. They are leading hypocrites who are making sabotaging the very hand that is trying to help them.

They are idolized by many Muslims - take care of your own kind first instead of telling US to stop critiquing Islam. What gall you have to insult our intelligence by accusing us of ``hurling abuse``. No one has ever hurled abuse at your religion or Prophet . You have accused many other people of ``abusing`` your religion (remember the case of the illiterate Masih boy who was accused of blasphemy and nearly executed and coutless others who are executed, assasinated or persecuted?).

You say your mullahs have no control over you - then why do most of you hate salman rushdie so much without as much as bothering to read his book ? Remember the book burnings YOU (not the Mullahs) carried out ? The mullahs have been your poor scape goats as always. Whenever the evil in you needs an excuse you look to mullahs and willingly sumit to evil of Islam.

It is YOUR fault, you chose to give up your reason and you ``submitted`` and ``surrendered`` to Islam - you and many people like you. Do you blame the Mullahs for abusing the power you give them. Do you blame them when they say ``You are a doctor you cure my obesity problem. I am an Alim I will advise you in matters of killing non muslims``? Do you blame them when they say :``If you have a problem with your car you go to a mechanic because he went to an engineering school and has engineering experience- if you have a problem with your religion you go to a Maulana because he went to a religious school and has religious experience``. They are absolutely right. The power from the Mullahs is given to them BY YOU !


But when the world asks why ? you blame some innocent boy from the madrasah : ``it is all his fault he is misleading people in the name of our religion``. YOU are the ones using the religion. You are the ones choosing the path of easy virtue and easy conscience by shifting the blame and responsibility to some poor fanatic (too possessed by an overdose of Islamic brainwashing to discern his own good).

Shame on you, you irresponsible hypocrites. Why do you not have the courage to discard the mask of Islam behind which you committ your crimes ? Get rid of the mask rather than blaming the mask maker. Get rid of Islam and there will be no need of blaming the Mullahs. Things will become much simpler and you will not have to come up with imaginative excuses to justify selfish, social maneuvers(sp?)

http://www.csmonitor.com/durable/2001/01/17/fp7s2-csm.shtml
A veil drapes Cairo campus in controversy

PM 300

Sure.. don`t worry... I understand perfectly well.

perhaps its time to change the topic...

Take care mate!

fairdinkum #297 There is a real danger of the mullahs taking power with the help of the generals. These two parties realize that they would never be voted into power by the people of Pakistan. I think we need to put as much pressure on the military as we can, in whatever way we can, to do their patriotic duty and give back power to the people and stop building up the mullahs. Islam is the personal business between the individual and God, there is no room for self-appointed intermediaries like mullahs and shariah courts - this simple fact is made amply clear in the Quran itself.

fairdinkum #297

``Finally, IMHO, wholesale condemnation of Islam/Muslims/religious people, I believe, is an ill-conceived approach towards handling the menace of Talibanism.``

hmmm... have you been talking to tahmed lately? :-)

But seriously, I understand perfectly where you`re coming from... Islam *is * much maligned and misunderstood... even among Muslims... I applaud your efforts to correct impressions.

I`m not in the mood to repeat (again!) what it is I am actually opposing in my `bashing` posts.

sincerely,

P.

PM #295

“fairdinkum, I would be lying if I said I didn`t have problems with anyone pointing out Islam`s `preferntial treatment` of ahl-e-kitab. For where does that leave the kafirs/agnositcs/Buddhists etc??”

Hmm, I should start reading your posts more carefully :) Interesting point! Salvation for mankind… yes, of course. Rest is all BS… And if religion does not aspire for that then what is the point of all the mumbo Jumbo?

PM, you’ll find the following link interesting… we can talk about this matter once you have read the article. I know the pragmatic, liberal, scientific view on your above statement… but I always find the religious explanations/discussions rather interesting… In the Islamic literature that I have read… I have not come across anything similar to what is discussed in the following article…

http://www.religion-online.org/cgi-bin/relsearchd.dll?action=showitem&id=247

Stay cool! Btw I enjoy the use of “falana” in your posts :)

PM #295

Dear Patrick,

“But doing this with a view to(or with the result of) somehow support(ing) Islam as a complete basis for lesgislative apparatus can, IMHO, have distrastrous results.”

Let me say it clearly so that no ambiguity remains.

Yes, I am sure that implementation of Shariah law will have disastrous consequences for all of us in Pakistan… I would be the first one to get my mother and my sisters out the place ASAP… given the jahalat and kameengi prevalent amongst clergymen I am absolutely sure that that is what will happen if shariah was imposed as the supreme law of the land in Pakistan… I am totally and utterly opposed to such endeavors in a society where corruption, nepotism, cronyism, injustice, and cowardice is rampant. It is entirely possible to conceive of a society where shariah is fully implemented, and practiced (i.e. a pure juris prudential society) but which is morally, and ethically bankrupt. S Arabia, and Afghanistan are stark examples of such a society. And given that Pakistan is already morally and ethically bankrupt, implementation of shariah can only make matters worse by making Mullahs the supreme leaders of the nation.

Please understand that my intentions in offering apologetics for Islam are not geared towards supporting implementation of shariah laws at all. I turn to Islam of Mohammad, and I turn to Muslims, so that we can understand and realize that what is on offer in the name of Shariah is too damn dangerous… what Mullah Omar has implemented in Afghanistan is a perversion (of the lowest and meanest kind) of Mohammad’s vision for humanity. However, I can’t talk to Muslims if I come out with guns blazing and hurl abuse at Mohammad, his companion, Mohammad’s family, the Quran etc. etc. why is it so hard for people to understand that any change for the better in a religious society like Pakistan has to come from within? Do you think you can stop the perverted Islam of Mullah Omar from spreading into Pakistan by describing Islam as a barbaric religion, which should be condemned? It is this approach I object to. I hope you understand.

I am aware of your (and hamidm’s for that matter) sincere desire see the oppressed, and downtrodden people of Pakistan live in peace and prosperity. You have tried hard to focus the debate on issues, which may arise as a result of implementation of Shariah and the disastrous consequences that are certain to follow any such stupid move in Pakistan. However, I have problems with hurling abuse at the very essence of Islamic faith. You must understand that “religious” people are not necessarily “bigots” like Mullah Omar. Most religious don’t even think that they are “religious” … I think we spoke on this matter on another occasion?

Finally, IMHO, wholesale condemnation of Islam/Muslims/religious people, I believe, is an ill-conceived approach towards handling the menace of Talibanism. If you were responsible for policy making in Pakistan, how would you handle the problem of ``Talibanism`` ?

PM #285 I got into specifics with you: provided you with a specific example - and repeated it at your request - of what I considered to be a clear case of intellectual dishonesty on your part. You conveniently side-stepped the issue with an over-clever set of arguments, without doing me the courtesy of a straight answer (let alone an honest apology). So, excuse me for not discussing anything seriously with you.

Siagalph #235

If Deewan-e-Ghalib is changed, then I don`t know but before you wrote the correction version in current Deewan is:

Har Ek Baat Pe Kehte Ho Tum Ke Tu Kia Hai

Tumhi Kaho Ke Yeh Andaaz-e-Guftgoo Kia Hai.

The current version of your recent verse is:

Is Saadgi Pe Kon Na Mar Jaye Ay Khuda

Karte Hain Qutl Aur Haath Mein talwaar Bhi Nahin.

With apology to me if I am also wrong.

But you are still too good for Urdu as visiting language.

re. #272

Dear fairdinkum,

I sincerely appreciate your efforts to illustrate the `friendly` nature of Islam. I am well aware of verses and ahadith that exhort tolerance and respect for followers of the book. (Though in all fairness, there are other, less friendly, verses, which I do believe were quite situational in nature, that also exist).

fairdinkum, I would be lying if I said I didn`t have problems with anyone pointing out Islam`s `preferntial treatment` of ahl-e-kitab. For where does that leave the kafirs/agnositcs/Buddhists etc??

This illustrates what I think is a danger with your quoting from the Quran/hadith... You might quite correctly quote those verses/traditions that represent the more enduring message of the faith, but -- BUT -- for every such verse you reproduce, there is some self-interested (or merely overzealous) guy ready to produce one to the contrary -- which I grant was probably relevant only in a certain situation (during war, for instance).

If this were all a private matter of faith, I`d have no gripe with those supplying alternative interpretations and even far-out apologetics. So much the better! But doing this with a view to(or with the result of) somehow support(ing) Islam as a complete basis for lesgislative apparatus can, IMHO, have distrastrous results.

Pankaj,

Hi. You say: ``What are the attributes of human mind that can not be programmed. Emotions form one such attribute``

I wonder why you suppose emotions are not programmable. Given that our emotions are products of chemical/neurological reactions, isn`t is at least imagineable to reproduce them in neural/biological networks? Ahhh.. but, you will say, those will be mere simulations, not the real thing-- not it`s OWN. Right? Well, may that perception be nothing more than our self-centrism... in other words, a subjective bias?

rgds

Pat.

P.S. Yeah, thinking of machine consciousness gives me the creeps too, but it`s always interesting to ask why, nO? :)



Sameer,

I hear you. I agree with almost everything you write (and am enlightened by some of it). More thoughts to follow...

rgds,

PM

re zahra

Thank you for your very kind words. I wish I could find some site where there are translations of some of the best shers.

On a serious note, think about something. The ghazal is the sublimest form of men courting women (of course that`s not all they are about)and the emotions expressed therein by men for women are nothing short of worshipful, eg

Prastash ki yahan tak ke ai but tujhe,

Nazr mein sabhon ki khuda kar chale (Meer)

How can this same culture commit, condone, and culturally accept honour killings and marital rape etc etc? Any clues?

PM :

There is enough testimony from Hindus and Buddhists that there is something to be discovered within the depths of our consciousness. What I mention is in that context.

Mind, consciousness are subjective phenomenon. If quoting physicists is useful, note the observation of Schrodinger that consciousness is always experienced in the singular. There are profound difficulties in bringing the scientific method to bear on it. For now, there is only one way to know if what is claimed by the traditions is true or not.

If you can not think of ``pink rhinocerous`` for the next thirty seconds, you may have a mind sufficiently trained to verify or not, the claims made by the traditions I mentioned above.

-Arun Gupta

RSaxena :

Actually, the statement ``the universe is pointless`` is a strong statement. It may be answering a question that may be as meaningless as ``what is the color of the electron ?`` It is asserting that the question ``does the universe have a purpose`` is meaningful and that the answer is ``no``.

--

In any case, in Hinduism, as far as I am aware, the purpose of the universe, if it has one, is unknown. It is part of the mystery called ``Maaya``, which is incorrectly translated or understood to mean ``illusion`` or ``delusion``. I believe that the Buddha also did not care to address this question. So, S.Wein.`s statement is an incorrect reason for atheism.

--

I read Feynman as believing that whether the universe has a purpose or not is irrelevant. S.W. on the other hand is pessimistic -- projecting his own belly-ache onto the world.

--

Can something be beautiful and pointless ? Actually, beautiful things may justify their own existence.

-Arun Gupta

Our reality of our ``consciousness`` is an academic subject no more and no less than the reality of your coffee mug sitting in front of you, and how it should be described -- quantum mechanically or in Newtonian terms.

Moreover, consciousness is primary, all else is filtered through it. So far, religion, and specifically Vedanta/Yoga/Tantra, has far more to say about the nature of consciousness than does science.

Yes, science may know about it in 200 years. Or maybe someone will come up with an impossibility proof -- you never know.

-Arun Gupta

Dost Mittar Jee:

I just conducted a search and found the following worth mentioning sites. Hope you`ll find them interesting.

1) http://www.go.com/?win=_search&sv=M6&qt=ghalib&oq=&url=http%3A//www.xiber.net/%7Easad/&ti=DEEWAN-E-GHALIB&top=&svx=NotFound

2)http://www.go.com/?win=_search&sv=M6&qt=ghalib&oq=&url=http%3A//www.cs.wisc.edu/%7Enavin/india/songs/ghalibindex.html&ti=Ghazals+of+Mirza+Ghalib&top=&svx=NotFound

Take Care,

PS. #286

You say:

“spiritual and scientific are two different realm. However, one can easily be scientific in all matters of material world and spiritual only in the matters of non-material.”

Read the post-modern critique of Quantum physics on the site I suggested…

Sameer #274

Dear Sameer,

Modernity and the absolute, unquestionable rule of science have been under attack in this post-modern era. Many traditional scientific principles held sacred by scientific community and never in doubt in societies, which held science in almost “God like” regard are now being questioned. You seem to be equating modernism/science with rationality and any other view with irrationality. This is an extreme modernist position carrying an implicit claim to omniscience that allows you to know that nowhere in the universe could the supernatural exist.

Regarding scientific objectivity, traditional view is that:

Scientists are supposed to be objective observers. They study nature by direct observation, indirect observation or through controlled experiments intended to rule out bias.

Post-modern critique:

Observations do not interpret themselves. They are interpreted by a mind and the biases of any particular person or group conducting the experiment. They also argue that human minds are affected by their culture and language to such an extent that the ``actual`` nature of things may be unknowable.

http://www.xenos.org/classes/papers/pomosci.htm

For a quick look at traditional scientific principles and their post-modern critique…

Comments?

tahmed321

I see you`ve obviously no intention of getting into specifics (even after I obliged you with the same), so okay, if it makes you feel any better, go ahead and stick with the childish name-calling. Never mind my request to you to produce one specific quote of mine that you can show as Islam-bashing.

Sameer
``For average Pakistan also, the desire to ultimately accumulate enough good deeds play very significant role in their insecure feelings despite a 97.5 percent Muslim country because there is no way of knowing when your account is in the green. The fear of being in red keeps them working in that direction. ``

Not very different in India, too. You should look at anonymous gifts to Indian temples made in penitence.

However, why does Mullah Omar think he will get to heaven and people like Ms. Asma Jahangir willnot?

Sadhana

Re: Pankaj

I will guess that there is nothing about the human brain that cannot be recreated artificially....we don`t know enough to be able to do it right now and probably will not know enough for another 200 years. But that is not to say that it is impossible. Even emotions are nothing more than the effects of several complex chemical interactions (which we don`t yet understand). Love too has biological and evolutionary explanations. It bonds us to our significant others so we reproduce often (biological duty), to our children so we raise them to reproduce and continue our genetic line, to friends so they will be there in the hour of need to ensure our survival, etc. etc. This is a rather self-centric explanation but you see the point...there is a reason for everything.

I may sound like the ultimate cynic but that`s not my intention...I am also not trying to deny the beauty of human relationships and our existence...just trying to get a practical understanding.

Consider this example. For a while people committing crimes were thought to be possesed by the devil and innately evil...we now understand that no one is born evil or violent, they are just victims of their environment...this scientific approach can help us find solutions to preventing crime and violence...believing that people have some hoky-poky spirit and essential-being will lead us to Witch Trials as the solution to the problem.

krashid #275, ``Man is formed by his enviornment. And you have a duty to bring your children up. You cannot leave them at the mercy of society.``

I agree. That`s why I won`t let my children be swallowed by that society called mullahs, priests, and other bs like that.

``f I look back at my life. My parents did a good job of raising me up. Giving me good moral values etc. Now I am independent, those values, teachings and brought up is part of my life even in the

``Deen-less`` society and I am proud of it.``

Good for you. Values, teachings, and morals are taught at home, like you just said. Not by religious leaders.

All they can do is spread propaganda and make religion into a garbled mess. YOu know and I know that the true spirit of faith/spirituality/God is not really taught at these schools. I remember going to an Ustaani when I was a kid, learning to read the Quran. If I pronounced something wrong, I was scolded and made a fool out of. Is that the true meaning of religion? I didn`t know what I was reading, just the fact that what I was reading had to be pronounced just right. The only thing I learned from this Sunday school was ``proper`` Arabic pronunciation and how to tie a dupatta around my head so tightly that it stopped the blood circulation of my scalp. Religion is not supposed to be torture.

It wasn`t until I read the book in English did I understand the true meaning of it, and that Islam wasn`t all about what Mullahs or Ustaanis said. And I could judge for myself what was good and what was bad.

Re: macgupta

``#235, RSaxena : no, contrast Richard Feynman, also an atheist and a ``realist`` with Steven Weinberger. Feynman`s writings are about how the universe is this very interesting and fun place, not about its pointlessness, optimism instead of pessimism.``

I know Feynman`s writings well. I think we are discussing two different points here. Feynman took great delight in explaining the beauty of science and physics to the public and he should be applauded for that. He had amazing communication skills. But he never believed or suggested some profound reason for the universe`s existence or for our existence in it. Weinberger, while he may not have tried to communicate the beauty of the universe, did reach the same conclusions. Surely you will agree that something can be beautiful but pointless, won`t you?

``In any case, an education in physics provides an excellent understanding of the limitations on one`s ability to know what is ``real``. My answer is : ``God`` is as ``real`` as my ``consciousness``; I cannot do any better. E.g., if ``consciousness`` is purely material and is an emergent property of the matter in my brain, then ``God`` is likewise an emergent property of the universe. If my ``Consciousness``, which is subjective, can be ``real``, then so can ``God``.``

We can get into a fruitless debate over this but I don`t believe that what we don`t know must be ascribed to god. That article mentions that our brains have evolved limited by our existence on one planet and by time...surely we have a long way to go before we understand everything. Also, challenging our own consciousness is a bit academic...you and I are communicating so let`s assume that we *perceive * each other to be conscious; whether we are conscious in an absolute sense is irrelevant then.

By the way, you could rewrite your statements above and replace the word ``God`` with ``devil`` (to the exclusion of god) and it would be equally difficult to prove or disprove.

Sigalph:

Thanks for the sweet and pertinent couplet :-). Interestingly, your choice of words and selection of verses is better than many on board. Most of the native speakers are as clueless as you can imagine, therefore lack the spontaneity to think on those terms, let alone quote any bur`justaa` verse! In short, you do not have to justify your stance. Keep it up!!!

Take Care

Good Ones!!!!

A long article on this subject in News From Bangladesh today at:

http://www.bangladesh-web.com/news/jan/16/fv4n455.htm#1

Ras

re zahra

Baji, thank you for the correction to the correction. I am humbled both by dost-mittar`s effort and yours. As you probably realize I am not a native speaker of the language and thus any indulgence on part of all of you is most appreciated.

But you are, even other than this post, quite sharp and incisive in a few words. I am impressed. Or, to continue the tradition, in the words of the same Delhi poet,

``Is saadgi pe kaun na mar jaye Asad,

Larte hain aur haat mein talwaar bhi nahin``

Thank again.

Dost Mittar:

Scout #238

I totally disagree with your point.

Man is formed by his enviornment. And you have a duty to bring your children up. You cannot leave them at the mercy of society.

It is a B-S spread by well to do people in society. I see with my own eyes everyday, the consequences of such an approach in poor socio-economic strata of society.

If I look back at my life. My parents did a good job of raising me up. Giving me good moral values etc. Now I am independent, those values, teachings and brought up is part of my life even in the ``Deen-less`` society and I am proud of it.

Sadhana # 266: Thanks for clarification. Actually it was my mistake to have misread your previous post.

PM: I am not tilting or changing my mind about God. The discussion was about Universe, Science and Steven Weinberg. I make clear distinction between Science which I believe whole-heartedly and non-Scientific matters. Science is backed by verifiable laws that govern nature. Why should quantized energy that has created the whole material universe be anything but pointless. Pointless does not mean unintersting particularly given the capabilities of human mind to create interest by creating patterns in a patternless and seeing chaos in well-organized systems. The only faculty of human mind beyond limit is imagination and consciousness comes in that category. It can by-pass the limitations of time and space in that mode only unless there is a malfunction like schizophrenia. You may be able to create a consiousness situation by starving your brain of oxygen through mediatation or any other mean of deep concentration but it is totally internal and does not change the outer universe. Otherwise, brain works as programmed through evolution. It will not allow the eyes to see objects who do not reflect or emit light, nor will it allow eyes to see microscopic or atomic/ sub-atomic level realities of the universe. There is no place in science that is immeasurable and a matter of belief only.

I will happily talk about God outside the discussion of science. It has diffenet meaning for different people. It is not an absolute necessity though because a good 30 percent of the world population is having a perfect normal and happy life without him-despite all the efforts of last 3000 years to make people believe in Him. Even among the 70 percent or so who believe in it do not agree with one common definition of Him. More and more people are accepting it internally as opposed to externally. I have previously discussed with you about my interest in eastern philosophies and creating an internal God or consiousness or ``I`` factor. I still believe in It because It is helpful to me in relaxation of my mind. I am not fearful of It (or Him), it does not cost my time and does not ask me to make my decisions only if they filter through the coded and loaded sieve.

Pointless of scientific universe is nothingness of spiritual universe and only Buddhism comes closest in bridging the two together. For the followers of rest of the religions, spiritual and scientific are two different realm. However, one can easily be scientific in all matters of material world and spiritual only in the matters of non-material.

Man, it is getting confusing-just discard it. Just be pragmatic and practical.

PM #268 I see from your post that you think all has been hunky-dory with your previous posts. That means the problem is, as I feared, deeper than I originally thought: the problem will not go away with simple introspection. I am afraid this calls for an operation...

PS Better whisper your last curses to Islam before the brain surgeon starts on you

PM #257

I empathize with your disenchantment. The issue of rights of religious minorities in Islam/Pakistan is not clouded by smokescreen of `interpretation` – at least for those who have managed to keep sanity… The way Pakistanis and Talibans of Afghanistan treat religious minorities, women and the weak is uncivilised, unjust, immoral, and therefore, un-Islamic.

“I have been studying Islam for many years, and I cannot see any valid reason why this religion and Christianity cannot co-operate. I know that some fanatic men in Islam preach jihad (holy war) against unbelievers and that they try to assassinate their own leaders to foment such war. But no sensible Muslim listens to them. They are today`s equivalent of the hotheaded Christian knights who, in the Middle Age vowed to exterminate all Muslims. Age cures such rashness.

“People of the West will meet numerous problems in the Muslim world. But many of them will be softened by a remark that Muhammad made to his followers: ``You will find your most affectionate friends will be those who say, `We are Christians`.``

James A. Michener’s “How the West sees the prophet of Islam”

Dear Arun#265

Good post. In my opinion optimism and pessimism ae very subjective notions. I liked you following para.

You say

``In any case, an education in physics provides an excellent understanding of the limitations on one`s ability to know what is ``real``. My answer is : ``God`` is as ``real`` as my ``consciousness``; I cannot do any better. E.g., if ``consciousness`` is purely material and is an emergent property of the matter in my brain, then ``God`` is likewise an emergent property of the universe. If my ``Consciousness``, which is subjective, can be ``real``, then so can ``God``. And so on. ``

In fact some of the most exciting and difficult research in present is over conciousness. It is difficult to say if Conciousness is subjective or objective. Can the neural networks be designed based on the stimulus-response type of connections that simulate intelligence. Can a robot equipped with a highly advanced artificial intelligence codes be ``aware`` of his existence, that is conciousness. What are the attributes of human mind that can not be programmed. Emotions form one such attribute. Can everything *rational * and *logical * be coded!What exactly is Conciousness. These are some very interesting debates we often have in my friend circle.(being a student I always find some time for such mindless chat:). To pay tribute to Stephen Hawkings who is presently visiting India, I have started reading his book,``A brief history of Time``. I read some Special Theory of relativity in my undergrads but reading it in extremely simple form was a pleasure.



Sincerely

Mr. Gupta,

I must admit, i have a problem with..

[My answer is : ``God`` is as ``real`` as my ``consciousness``; I cannot do any better. E.g., if ``consciousness`` is purely material and is an emergent property of the matter in my brain, then ``God`` is likewise an emergent property of the universe. If my ``Consciousness``, which is subjective, can be ``real``, then so can ``God``. And so on. ]

Isn`t it that your consciousness is real by necessity? That is, `you think therefore you are`.

how does God, or any other `emergent property of the universe` pass the test of `real` by necessity?

Also, what exactly is denoted by god here?

And finally, if God is allowed by this reasoning, what can NOT be allowed?

rgds,

PM

re. macgupta #264

Arun, excellent, excellent post! Helped me put my own finger on what I find discomforting in RSaxena`s philosopical materialism (a position sameer seems to be leaning towards lately?!?)

Kinda reminded me of a Roger Primrose book that came out in the late 80`s... The Emperor`s new Mind -- essential reading for anyone interested in the subject of consciousness.

Thanks for the succint summary of those ideas.

rgds,

PM

tahmed321 #264

``Is it logical to accuse someone of ``shouting out`` on the internet (I am not even using capital letters, which is the closest people come to shouting on the internet)?``

Forgive me, but I didn`t know we were applying the principles of logic to vocabulary usage (as opposed to ideas). Ever so sorry!

`` Maybe the cool Islam-bashing westernized PM is getting a little worked up??``

I guess we will have to define Islam-bashing, my friend. (please note, `friend` not used here with sound verbal logic- just manner of speaking). Please pick out one statement that you can show conclusively to be Islam-bashing. Caveat: my relating facts from history, with however much sarcasm, does not qualify as bashing.

``OK, I`ll oblige. Go back to my post #234, and read it carefully and calmly. Then go read your own post and read it carefully and calmly and objectively. If you still think that I have not already obliged you in #234 by providing a clear instance of intellectual dishonesty, then I think you are in worse shape than I think.``

I still don`t think you have. Why? because 1) You never clarified which part of hamidm`s post you found so amusing, and b)even you did, I`d have thought your a dork to excuse the quite clear Islam-bashing that hamidm often engages in simply because, unlike Solitude or myself, he is humourous/actually mocks the religion.

On second thought, I take back dork. Osrrich seems to be a more descriptive word.

``Let me also provide an example of lack of decency. You quote me as ``blah blah blah`` above. I hope for your sake that you dont see nothing wrong with this (excuse the double negatives, but maybe this will force you to think a bit despite your rage).``

Ok. Thought it through. Now, if the best you can do in providing an example of my alleged indecency is point to my using `blah blah blah` -- after you bestowed that kindly epithet of bigot upon me-- then, you, my friend, are obviously clutching at straws.

Rage? I think I lost that some 150 posts ago. You seemed to haved found it just about then. But of course, the image of raging mad Islam-basher would fit your schema quite conveniently, wouldn`t it? The idea of someone opposing your beliefs with reason and passion is much harder to swallow.

Guess you got more than you bargained when you asked someone to `go on telling it like it is`, huh? :-)

Yes, I did get carried away, and would probably bite my lip a little if I were to do this again. but then, I`m hardly solely guilty of this misdemeanour.

g`night now,

P.

Sameer #264
Just to clarify I meant the quote from the Gita for ``The likes of Mullah Omar, Mufti Saeed and Maulana Shamzai are rushing in to get the front row seat in the year [A x 10 exp n] of Our Lord.``

Sadhana

PM #249 You write ``You keep shouting out that we are guilty of illogicism...``

Is it logical to accuse someone of ``shouting out`` on the internet (I am not even using capital letters, which is the closest people come to shouting on the internet)? Maybe the cool Islam-bashing westernized PM is getting a little worked up??

You continue ``intellectual dishonesty blah blah blah. However, I don`t recall a SINGLE instance of your actually supporting your allegations with concrete eveidence. Care to oblige?``

OK, I`ll oblige. Go back to my post #234, and read it carefully and calmly. Then go read your own post and read it carefully and calmly and objectively. If you still think that I have not already obliged you in #234 by providing a clear instance of intellectual dishonesty, then I think you are in worse shape than I think.

Let me also provide an example of lack of decency. You quote me as ``blah blah blah`` above. I hope for your sake that you dont see nothing wrong with this (excuse the double negatives, but maybe this will force you to think a bit despite your rage).

#235, RSaxena : no, contrast Richard Feynman, also an atheist and a ``realist`` with Steven Weinberger. Feynman`s writings are about how the universe is this very interesting and fun place, not about its pointlessness, optimism instead of pessimism.

``Realist`` as you used it -- concerned only with what is ``real`` -- in this case means ``imposing one`s own prejudices on reality``. Otherwise, which of Weinberg or Feynman is/was being ``real`` ?

In any case, an education in physics provides an excellent understanding of the limitations on one`s ability to know what is ``real``. My answer is : ``God`` is as ``real`` as my ``consciousness``; I cannot do any better. E.g., if ``consciousness`` is purely material and is an emergent property of the matter in my brain, then ``God`` is likewise an emergent property of the universe. If my ``Consciousness``, which is subjective, can be ``real``, then so can ``God``. And so on.

The limitation of science is that it cannot deal with anything that is not objective. Science maybe can probably measure neural activity and thereby predict that you love your spouse or do not; it can measure all aspects of love; but it still cannot know love. The difficulties with the Turing test show how it would be difficult to demonstrate consciousness objectively; but you don`t doubt existence of consciousness for a second.

An alternative definition of ``realist`` would be one who worries only about things that one can influence, and doesn`t worry about the rest. That definition doesn`t say anything about God either.

-Arun Gupta

Sadhana #260: The motion to kill the resolution condemning karo-kari came from Wali Khan`s party (ANP) who have some reasonable support among the Pushtu speaking population of NWFP. They were in coalition with NS and his PML. But the coalition was not in danger because of this non-binding resolution. The PML went along because they saw in it a defeat of Benazir`s party (PPP) and Asma Jahangir and her supporters. Defeating the opposition above all else seemed to be the motive for PML, some tribal Pathans traditions of karo-kari and a well-known supporter of ANP, being personally involved in the murder of her daughter or daughter-in-law, being the motive for ANP. For most politicians in Pakistan, it was a small potato to worry about. They care little about representing people who elect them. Their eyes are focussed on the bigger prize, the Power.

Not only this, but later general Pervaiz Musharraf was seen (in newpaper photograph) shaking hand during a meeting with tribal elders in Peshawar, with one of the well-known person involved in karo-kari. He did vaguely clarified but the person in question, I believe, is still a free man.

I would rather avoid commenting about Quran or Bhagavad Gita. However, I do not think members of the National Academy of Sciences here in the USA are anything of ``limited understanding``. They have one of the best understanding in their respective fields and they constitute the most non-religious gathering in the USA.

[``O Arjuna, men of limited understanding presume speculative interpretations of the Vedic scriptures, advocating that there is no divine principle in creation....]

I agree that other than religious duty, failure to achieve political power by fair means is also a major factor in the insecurity feeling of religious parties in Pakistan but the push still comes from a desire to go to heaven ultimately. For average Pakistan also, the desire to ultimately accumulate enough good deeds play very significant role in their insecure feelings despite a 97.5 percent Muslim country because there is no way of knowing when your account is in the green. The fear of being in red keeps them working in that direction.

To Chowkstaff,

what`s the point of typing two of my last posts and not my first one. Please get this problem rectified.

regards

Omar Phoenix

Re: Pat,

Your first name not so cryptically suggests the religion you were born into. As given as I am to the affects of the nefarious Brain Cloud, the fact that you sign off as Patrick Masih still failed to elude me. :)

My statement regarding religious states may be obvious to you and I, but there are plenty of scholars here who make statements like, ``Islam is secular`` with equal confidence of it`s obviousness.

Rgds,

Latif

Rsaxena
I suspect you read a lot of `Sarita`. :-).

Sameer #250
Did the senators you mention block the resolution due to their own sincerely held(and well-understood) religious beliefs or some other worldly reasons such as not upsetting their own power pyramid applecart?

`` It is about accumulating good deeds (sawabs) by the kilograms, to be traded in afterlife for a place in heaven with houris (for mullahs) and ghalmans (for Babar et. al). The likes of Mullah Omar, Mufti Saeed and Maulana Shamzai are rushing in to get the front row seat in the year [A x 10 exp n] of Our Lord.``

Again donot discount worldy expedience.

I think you will like this quote from the Gita, though, testifying to the universality and timelessness of man`s venality.

http://www.bhagavad-gita.org/Gita/verse-02-42.html

``O Arjuna, men of limited understanding presume speculative interpretations of the Vedic scriptures, advocating that there is no divine principle in creation, full of lascivious desires, aiming to attain the lush heavenly worlds; they glorify only the statements in the Vedas which are pleasing to their senses; performing numerous ostentatious rituals productive of good birth, wealth and power insuring sense enjoyment and worldly pleasures.``

Sadhana

Dear RSaxena + Scout,

During my paperboy days, I used to shop on behalf of quiet a few old ladies and yes, I repressed my desi business nature by not charging them. It made the Christmas bonus that bit sweeter...

I`ll just use one of the examples here but it was applicable to all. Her name was Mrs Murphy...and yes, she was a gin swigging, fag tottin Irish. Her story was typical, one single son who never visited her, one 4 year old grandson whom she hardly had any chance to see. She had an absolutely miserable life because she told me all about it and she died in pain. What’s so painful is that she used to hide her money behind the sofa waiting for her grandson to arrive when she would give him the money. It never happened because she died.

Now I wouldn’t dare label every parent here as miserable and in agony but I’m using purely my experience here and let’s be honest, elders have it better over in desilands than here. What matters at that age is you seeing your progeny in action and your grandchildren running all around you and happiness and noise, not BUPA pension schemes and 100% cotton bandages.

This is a generalisation though but I would suggest anyone to go to hospitals and old people’s homes and see the environment. Of course, the Asian parents pound for pound put a hell of a lot of investment in their children as compared to the others, so you gotta expect some return somewhere.

Take care and best wishes

Omar Phoenix

re. L. Chappu #254

``Seems to me like a state based on religious tenets can only be successful if it`s totalitarian and devoid of religious minorities.``

Now you`re developing the knack of stating the obvious too, eh? :-)

FYI, (in case you`re not aware) I am very much a Pakistani religious minority member.

re. fairdinkum #249

Dear S,

``Given the socio-political situation of poverty stricken South Asia, politics of conflict (whether it be in the name of ideology or religion or secularism or reason or personal conviction) is immoral. The educated and enlightened people of subcontinent should join hands and work for peace and prosperity in the region rather than engage in hate mongering. Positive/constructive debates/discussion with a view to developing empathy for each other’s viewpoint, IMHO, is the way to go.``

Well said! I guess I am guilty of atrophying that all-important element of empathy somewhere between encountering apologetics, relating it personal experiences with rape victims, being labelled an Islam-basher and a bigot, and witnessing so much of pussyfooting on the part of the `educated and enlghtened people of the subcontinent`.

Perhaps I need to develop the skill getting ones point across merely by asking probing questions like a certain someone does so well... However, I honestly feel that that approach may not work so long as we have ostriches with their heads in the sand, about to hide behind the smokescreen of `interpretation` every time something unpleasant is brought up.

If this were all simply a matter of theological intricacies, I couldN`T have cared less about who believes in what. However, one`s attitudes towards these issues, and how to tackle them, impact directly on the levarage that the extremists have over political affairs. I`d like to see how you, or tahmed or any of the non-confrontatioists here would tackle the Taliban, or JUI, on the grounds that their interpretation of 4:34 or whatever is ummm.. outdated. Such folks (the jehadis) THRIVE ON the absence of physical confrontation (give `em an inch...). You think their power rush can be arrested with your nice, `reasonable` interpretations??

Yes, it`s all very well, for us in the West, or Far East, to wax eloquent on how Islam actually protects the rights of the women etc. etc. Given the propensity, however, for those passages to be interpreted differently in `poverty stricken` South Asia, I am disgusted with what IMO is a lack of responsibility (we won`t talk about intellectual dishonesty here).

Folks here are engaging in lengthy apologetics, or else playing the ostrich, with little regard to how realistically enforceable their liberated views of Islam is in those regions. Ironically, the source of my disenchantment is the same as yours... that is, the real issue of how to tackle Pakistani rape laws is not realistically addressed.

Am I confrontational? Well, yes... though I hardly think I`m doing it for the pleasure of seeing others cringe. If it takes a bit of poking and prodding, a bit of `confromtation` to wake some folks up to their pussilamainty, then confront I will.---lest we end up having these curious occurences of folks being merely `amused` by the humorous element of hamidm`s post, while comfortably ignoring the unfunny parts.

But then, content in the comfort of their new three-bedroom home in suburbia, with their 2.5 children safely isolated from those jehadi elements in Pakistani schools and curriculum, they can `safely` and happily expound on the virtues of `true` Islam... if only interpreted rightly.

Nothing generally wrong with that... except that in the context of this board.. it`s all, IMO, irresponsible.

here`s something from that virtuous icon Madonna:

`` `Make love not war they say`

It`s easy to recite

But it don`t mean a thing

unless we`re gonna fight ....``

Hopefully, we can keep the fighting limited to words!

Best regards,

P

Of course, it then sounds hypocritical for lets say me to criticise someone else`s religion and beliefs. Do I really have the right to judge XYZ`s beliefs and ask...naah, again I`m going to stop. The point being, let`s stay from religios talk when most of us can`t even work out our taxes.

This sort of thought obviously leads to 2 things. 1) You spend you whole life working out these things so that you can answer someone on the internet. B) You can ask the guy posing you the question, what do you represent, and then fire back their sh *t at them. Of course, here`s the genius bit. When someone clainms to be a part of your own religion, how do you answer them back? This would then lead you to become (1). And what seems to be stopping you...your vey own laziness. Of course it seems impractical for everyone to follow this path. Therefore more communication and education is required and that dabble of niyat...something that this article and the posts lack...which then somehow leads back to the original spot.

Let me ask you guys a questions, how many of you are actually ever going to do anything about marital rapes, about the sanitory problems, about education, about emancipation of the sexes blah blah. This is all biatch talk, yap yap yap. Do something constructive for Gods sake.

Omar Phoenix

re fairdinkum`s 251

Nothing to be impressed about the couplet. Taarif sab Khuda ki. But thank you none the less. Your post 248, where you called me ignorant, reminded me that you are doing alright!

It is a shame that we could have had elevated and serious interacts but have often degenarated to name-calling etc (I think I remember ignorant, arrogant, attitude etc). To quote another Delhi poet,

``Har ek baat pe kehte ho ke tu kya hai

Tum hi kaho ke ye andaze guftgoo kya hai``

Re: PM 226

Your observation about Indian snobbishness is absolutely accurate. It is indeed an amusing phenomenon. Quite regularly in Indian gatherings (both in India & outside) smug observations are made about how the Indians are so much smarter than the rest.

I was told growing up in India that Indian kids who perform above average in the Indian educational system positively kick butt in the American system when they immigrate. The logical conclusion being that Indians are inherently smarter.

What no one seems to account for that the Indians that do come to the US constitute the crème de la crème of the Indian education system and therefore naturally do better than the average American kid.

And this newfound prosperity in the Silicon Valley has only exacerbated this high and mighty attitude further.

My two cents on this are that with their post-colonial hangover the Indians feel so inferior to the westerners that they make foolish and desperate attempts to prove otherwise. The nation born out of Gandhian principles of Humility and `Head-on recognition` of its crippling poverty has now today reduced itself to Cultural Braggadocio & `Absolute denial` of the condition of its masses.

Re: PM 227

The ability of Muslims to stomach criticism from their own kin and their tendency to get angered when outsiders do - is only natural. A Jew can tell Jew-jokes but when a Christian does, Jews react with anger.

Frankly, being a Christian you have absolutely no right to criticize Islam and its practices. UNLESS...

Unless Islamic religious tenets and practices affect your (or your loved one`s) lives. A member of the religious minority in Pakistan HAS EVERY RIGHT TO CRITICISE ISLAM because it is part of the state`s apparatus.

To me this is one of the most intriguing paradoxes of mixing church & state. Organized religion seems to think that its sanctity and validity is compromised by constant questioning. The unwritten rule also seems to be that criticism of a faith is out of bounds if the source of the criticism is an outsider. But by assuming powers of the state, the religion opens itself up for constant questioning and criticism from outsiders thereby compromising its sanctity. Seems to me like a state based on religious tenets can only be successful if it`s totalitarian and devoid of religious minorities.

Latif Chappu

Re: SameerJB

You are absolutely right. The sooner people realize the vacuous nature of religious fantasy, the better the world will be.

``All they need to do is to know little Chemistry, Physics, Biology and mathematics and let some fresh air get to your head.``

Certainly....in that whole article, they provide data suggesting an unusually high number of atheists in the ranks of the most successful scientists. (There is also evidence proving that atheists are no more likely to commit crimes or be dishonest than believers are.)

``Can you believe, f---ing closet-mentality senators refusing to pass a resolution condemning karo-kari in Pakistan. This is worse than pessimism.``

Religion is and has been the bane of South Asia. I wanted to kick Vajpayee`s good knee when he supposedly went to a religious adviser for predictions/advice on national affairs.

While the US is eons ahead in keeping religion in its place, it still has a way to go (compared to more socially advanced countries like the Netherlands). It makes me want to vomit when George W. and his dimwit wife get on national TV and ask for our ``prayers`` to help him govern the country (see that article for more on this)...the last thing I need is a President on his knees waiting on Jesus for divine intervention to stop an incoming nuclear missile.

Re: scout

``Once again, you`re confusing emotional support with money and living expenses. Do you honestly believe that having social security, medicare and other benefits fills the emotional gaps in an elderly person`s life?``

Obviously it`s necessary to have both. Unfortunately, most of the elders in our countries our poor and do not have the luxury of automatically assuming that their medical bills and material needs (needs, not luxuries) will be taken care of. Is it not equally, if not more, important to have a roof over your head, medicine for your illness, and food for your table than 50 grandchildren to play with?

re sigalph235

I am struggling to be insaan... mulsmaan tu bohat door ki baat hai.

Baqool temporal:

Pehlay insaan phir musalmaan.

Thanks for momin`s couplet... I am impressed.

RSaxena # 235: Right on money. Steven Weinberg`s pointlessness of universe is not only realist but also practical. His specialty and concern are material world and not imaginery spiritual realms of knowledge. He is using all of his thinking mind, rationality and logic and not the small portion of it that deals with fear of the unknown and inability to predict future beyond death-that is beyond time and therefore can not be predicted based on the limitation of laws of nature on time. I think it is not at all pessimistic view. It is practical. Look at the other side. Air castles built on human imagination and then getting trapped within them, pretending to be happily living ever after. This, of course, takes away part of the zeal to contribute, to worry about social conditions and yearning to improve. Life outside the castle is more free, peaceful and rational. One does not have to read Solitude or hamidms` literary posts to think differently. All they need to do is to know little Chemistry, Physics, Biology and mathematics and let some fresh air get to your head. Can you believe, f---ing closet-mentality senators refusing to pass a resolution condemning karo-kari in Pakistan. This is worse than pessimism. Beating our chests over it would do nothing. It requires change in thinking-a thinking not bound by the limitations of air castles.

Sadhana # 239: [Which brings me to Muslim identity politics in Pakistan. Its a puzzle that a 98% Muslim country can feel insecure about its Muslim identity. ]

The identity politics in Pakistan is not about the insecure feeling. It is about accumulating good deeds (sawabs) by the kilograms, to be traded in afterlife for a place in heaven with houris (for mullahs) and ghalmans (for Babar et. al). Believe me, this the motivation for majority of those 98 percent you mentioned. They see it as a duty and not insecurity. The likes of Mullah Omar, Mufti Saeed and Maulana Shamzai are rushing in to get the front row seat in the year [A x 10 exp n] of Our Lord. Hell with this world which is temporary, organic-based life subject to oxidation (decay).

I can`t believe a smart lady like you could not understand the fundamental cause of their behavior. Haven`t you read Newton`s third law, ``To every action, there is equal and opposite reaction``. Make people more fearful of the wrath of God with scary details about hell, more submission you achieve.

My dear tahmed3-2-1-0

``Trouble is, the lack of logic is to be found in all ranks, including Solitude and PM.``

You keep shouting out that we are guilty of illogicism, intellectual dishonesty blah blah blah. However, I don`t recall a SINGLE instance of your actually supporting your allegations with concrete eveidence. Care to oblige?

Of course, it may suit your mental schema better to simply lump solitude and myself with your other whipping boys, the mullahs. Gives you that feeling of security and moral superiority that you are ranting against ALL forms of bigotry etc. How balnaced an approach!! wow-ee!!

btw, you suggest in #234 that the exhibiton of a sense of humour (such as hamidm`s) makes his posts more amenable to discourse. If this is the sort of `logic` you employ, don`t bother replying at all.. just get your head out of the sand.

PM #237

Dear Patrick,

You detect a hint of frustration in my responses… Well, it is hardly surprising since the real issue of rape and abuse of women in our society has been hijacked by those who would rather engage in Islam/Paki bashing.

Your statement:

“It is inevitable that some people (--in the original example, Shankar) will have views that differ from your own and are NOT proveable either way. If the mere assertion of his divergent view is perceived as confrontational, then there is indeed a problem with YOU (so long as he is not propagating hatred for anyone).”

I have no problems with divergent views. And I did not describe Shankar’s view of religion as confrontational… Please read my reply carefully.

Your statement:

“I suspect your protest against `bashing` and unconstructive criticism are only sustainable by the sheer dint of numbers and the weight of history. How is it we never hear protests about the `confronting` of Ahmedi doctrine, or of Christian docrine of Christ`s divinity by Muslims -- `supported` by quranic verses, no less.”

You are well aware of my thoughts in regards to the treatment of Ahmedis and other religious minorities in Pakistan. Ahmedis are entitled to their beliefs and should be free to practice their religion. The main issue of contention is their insistence that they be regarded as Muslims. Muslims (of all fiqahs), however, unanimously disagree… Fair enough… However, the approach/method adopted by Muslims of Pakistan to express their disagreement is uncivilized and immoral and should be condemned. The differences between Muslims and Christians wrt divinity of Christ, is a complex theological issue. I can quote verses and hadits, which strongly prohibit Muslims from confrontation (especially on religious issues) with the people of the book.

“Is it that confrontation of one religion based on another religion`s precepts is ok while confrontation based in reason and personal conviction is immoral??”

Given the socio-political situation of poverty stricken South Asia, politics of conflict (whether it be in the name of ideology or religion or secularism or reason or personal conviction) is immoral. The educated and enlightened people of subcontinent should join hands and work for peace and prosperity in the region rather than engage in hate mongering. Positive/constructive debates/discussion with a view to developing empathy for each other’s viewpoint, IMHO, is the way to go.

Your statement:

“I am beginning to agree more with sigalph235 little list. The cookie will have to crumble as it may.”

You are entitled to your views, and responsible for the choices you make. I, however, tend to disagree with views such as presented in sigalph235’s little list. It represents simplistic view of an ignorant man. Perhaps, you should also read the article I suggested to sigalph for a better understanding of the complexity of the issue of “fundamentalism.”

Kind regards,

S

Latif Chappu #242 I share your dismay at the island of animosity that the chowk seems to be becoming. However, there are a number of posters like yourself, hamidm, and perhaps a dozen others who ensure that some logic and sanity prevails here. Trouble is, the lack of logic is to be found in all ranks, including Solitude and PM. See my response to PM #234 and you will see the problem I have with these people. It has nothing to do with Islam being good, bad or irrelevant, and everything to do with the gross injustices to reason, rigid positions, and lack of respect for other viewpoints that these people demonstrate.

re fairdinkum`s

``I will say it loud… the hudood ordinance in Pakistan is one such law. It defeats the purpose of keeping the individuals protected from unnecessary pervasiveness. It is unjust and immoral.

As for affirmative actions, I am not in favour of such laws/policies. Once implemented, they have a use by life beyond which the law of diminishing returns takes hold… it is not very difficult for a society to recognize when that point of diminishing return has reached… GOI, and Indian society as a whole, probably knows that affirmative action policies are no longer working – instead the society as a whole is losing. However, the politicians now risk a massive political price, and the society risks instability if these polices are to be scraped.``

My, my! Lightning may strike but I agree with everything said above. Are you alright dude? Or should I mention the oft repeated line from Momin

``Umr saari to kati ishq-e-butaan mein Momin,

Aakhri waqt mein kya khaak Musulmaan honge``

(The irony is not lost on me at all).

In all seriousness, those hudood/zina ordinances decreed by an unelected barbarian in uniform, need to go. Best of luck in that endeavor.

tahmed321 (re. #234)

Right.

http://www.jang.com.pk/thenews/jan2001-daily/15-01-2001/oped/o5.htm

Latif Chappu #242,

There is criticism, then there`s hatred. There`s a difference between the two. I don`t mind criticism, I`ve criticized Islamic fundamentalists too. But spreading hatred (what Solitude does) is not my cup of tea.

Hamidm:

I`ve been lurking around here for quite a while and for what it`s worth, allow me to commend you on your edgy & humorous posts. You mirthful and cynical style is engaging because it thinly veils an island of sanity in this tumultuous ocean of spitefulness that is our beloved Chowk.

In your quotation from the NYT article you illustrate a very important point. For those that have been engrained in religiosity, the far limits of tolerance are defined by acceptance of other people`s faith. A total lack of `faith` is not to be accepted as a valid philosophy for it constitutes moral turpitude. This attitude betrays intellectual pusillanimity of the greatest order.

Look at the resistance mounted against PM & solitude (both so very different but yet the same to those who resist their thought).

Or look at Scout`s post #216 for that matter. As much as I appreciate her general stance pleading for tolerance of all religions, her post still excoriates Solitude for criticizing Islam. As if to suggest that rejecting religion per se is a great evil. As if following any religion constitutes certain virtuosity and non-religiosity leads to lack of morality if not immorality.

Organized religion has had complete control over qualities such as morality & spirituality for so long that for a lot of people they are inseparable. They need to wake up and smell the coffee.

Latif Chappu

Pankaj #200,

Yes it`s sad when elderly are respected just for the property they leave behind. I`ve seen such cases too. But what of the Western elderly, who are sent to nursing homes AND suffer the materialistic minds of their children.... Talk about a double whammy.

shankar #201, ``Let me tell you its a heck of a lot easier to take care of an elderly parent in our respective countries than the US.``

I agree, but does this have anything to do with what`s hard or easy? I mean, they are your parents. Did they question what was hard or easy while you were growing up? The way I see it is, if my parents sacrificed and worked hard to raise me, it would be a shame if I didn`t return the love, no matter how hard it may be. Can we solve our problems by giving up? And what makes us so sure that nursing homes provide the best of care?

Do those underpaid workers know who your parent is and what they need besides the basics?

``I remember my kid coming home to me very mad when I reminded her call her friend`s father Uncle Mike. ``Dad! he looked at me & started laughing--I felt like such a dork!``

To me, there`s nothing wrong with feeling like a dork due to my culture. In the long run, everyone respects the positive aspects of people`s cultures. When I went to France, and was greeted by a male with kisses on my cheeks, I was shocked and a bit offended. But when I saw it happening everywhere in France, I grew to accept it. What was the harm in it?

Rsaxena #214, ``Extended families? Do you know what that is all about? It`s the evil mother-in-law commanding an army of her sons` wives to cook,

clean, wash, rear kids (sons if they want preferential treatment), make chai for the fat father-in-law and be suffocated if they ever

express individuality. ``

You missed the key word in my statement, and that was ``as long as abusive relations dont occur...``

``Ever seen a 70-year-old woman go crazy at a shopping mall? Or put on make-up and go on a date

b.c. she`s widowed and lonely?``

Is that how you judge happiness? By what elderly people can gain here through money? By the way, why is this elderly woman lonely? Where are her children and grand children?

``They have social security, medicare, and other benefits. The elders in our countries couldn`t

dream of these benefits...the wealthy don`t have to worry but the poor (majority) wither away and die painfully. Some respect that is...``

Once again, you`re confusing emotional support with money and living expenses. Do you honestly believe that having social security, medicare and other benefits fills the emotional gaps in an elderly person`s life? Is that how they want to die? With money but no love? Would you like to die with money in the bank, or in the arms of people who love and cherish you?

fairdinkum #230

``GOI, and Indian society as a whole, probably knows that affirmative action policies are no longer working - instead the society s a whole is losing. However, the politicians now risk a massive political price, and the society risks instability if these polices are to be scraped. ``

I cannot agree fully, I have seen affirmative action policies making a material difference among my own contempories. (just incidentally Muslims are included in these in a few states). The participation of previously `disadvantaged` communities in Indian politics is ascribed in part to the success of these policies.

You are right that the issue is now within the scope of `identity` politics and potentially explosive, similar to the separate personal laws for different religious communities. Reform or change can only happen if accompanied by an impetus from WITHIN the communities for more universal justice.

``did not involve condemning the upper caste Hindus as evil beings who should be slaughtered for what they have done to schedule casts in the last 1000 years or so. If such an approach were employed, India would have experienced a lot of bloodshed, and instability. ``

Who is slaughtering whom in Pakistan may I ask? This is the first I am hearing of slaughter of religious leaders by the `liberals` who designate them evil and have no respect for Islam.

Secondly, GOI may not have designated upper caste Hindus as evil beings, but the state of Tamil Nadu comes pretty close. I used to hear about how its almost impossible for even a bright `forward caste` student to get admission in ordinary degree courses, forget about finding a job later.

And donot discount the fact that upper caste Hindus didnot choose to respond to a material degeneration of their options in life with `identity` politics of their own, much less take up guns and slaughter anyone/create an atmosphere of civic disorders in the name of `protecting religion` to protect their traditional advantages.

Which brings me to Muslim identity politics i Pakistan. Its a puzzle that a 98% Muslim country can feel insecure about its Muslim identity.

If say only 40% are literate and within reach of mass media and most of the rest are deeply religious, how would open discussion put Islamic values at risk?

``Should we rely on Solitude for our understanding of Islam (especially wrt to rights of women)?``

Thats upto those who may or maynot feel an urgency to make up their minds on the issue. I need to ask, even tahmed321 #217, who says
``That misperception is that Islam is what the mullah says it is. However, both Solitude and the fundamentalists conveniently gnore the fact that the mullah has no place in Islam. It is like representing the houghts of Thackarey as representing as Hinduism; or the thoughts of some KKK nut and representing that as American democracy.``

The hard fact is that the KKK is nowhere within light years of making law and defining American democracy, Thackeray is still many constitutional and conceptual handshakes away from defining or representing Hinduism.

But what of the mullahs in Pakistan?? How close are they to defining their own place in the practice of Islam and defining Islamic society in Pakistan? Who are those who wield this influence and what do they happen to subscribe to wrt rights of women? Should/can you rely on them for your understanding of Islam(especially wrt to rights of women).

``But what approach should we adopt? Do we condemn all Muslims on earth for what Talibans are doing in Afghanistan?``

No, but every criticism doesnot constitute a condemnation of `all Muslims`. I can, however condemn the presence of religion in politics to the detriment of both. The example in front of me is Islamic politics in the countries neighbouring India. If Muslims feel such a compulsion to ideal Islamic societies, they ought to be thinking harder (and clearer) about it. In the course of this endeavor, if they come across stumbling blocks or injury to their personal faith, well thats the risk of mixing the imperfections of real politick with the perfections demanded by spiritual belief.

``It is interesting that only a few Islamic countries (I think only Pakistan and S Arabia recognize Talibans as the legitimate rulers of Afghanistan.``

Yes, but we are talking of Pakistan and the dynamics of political Islam and Islamic laws in Pakistan. Are you saying the influence of Taliban and the story of their origins are irrelevent in this context?


Sadhana

hamidm #221 ``now, some wise-guy is surely going to ask why do i bother to send my kids to sunday school``

OK, why do you? I used to send my children to Sunday school until they protested that they were not learning anything. They questioned the wisdom of reading the Quran like a robot without understanding. We agreed on a compromise: They could stay at home on Sunday, as long as they regularly read the Quran in English. I think my thirteen year old now understands Islam better than the teachers at the Sunday school.

PM#227 It should be clear even to you that my response related to a different section of hamidm`s post than the one you selected to make your point. It is such lack of intellectual honesty and logic, not to mention lack of humor or even common decency, that is reflected in your posts that set your and hamidm`s posts miles apart.

hamidm #221, ``some wise-guy is surely going to ask why do i bother to send my kids to sunday school -it is all about testosterone defficiency and world peace ......``

Yes. So, If you`re so against organized religion, why send ur child to any religiously oriented school? I personally think that parents who send their children to sunday school, saturday school and friday schools are doing their children a disservice. At an age when they should be learning their abc`s and 123`s, their heads are being filled with Bible fantasies, Hadiths, and other such nonsense.

Now do you really send ur kids to sunday school or is this part of ur useless sarcastic humor again?

When I have kids, I won`t let any type of walking religious propaganda get near them to taint their innocent minds.

dear fairdinkum, (re. 230)

Do I detect a tone of disenchantment there?

Let me clarify what I meant earlier by saying that `you have proven my point`...

It is inevitable that some people (--in the original example, Shankar) will have views that differ from your own and are NOT proveable either way. If the mere assertion of his divergent view is perceived as confrontational, then there is indeed a problem with YOU (so long as he is not propagating hatred for anyone).

I suspect your protest against `bashing` and unconstructive criticism are only sustainable by the sheer dint of numbers and the weight of history. How is it we never hear protests about the `confronting` of Ahmedi doctrine, or of Christian docrine of Christ`s divinity by Muslims -- `supported` by quranic verses, no less.

Is it that confrontation of one religion based on another religion`s precepts is ok while confrontation based in reason and personal conviction is immoral??

I am beginning to agree more with sigalph235 little list. The cookie will have to crumble as it may.

regards,

P

Re: MacGupta

``Steven Weinberger is, to me, a profound pessimist, who wrote something to the effect that the more we understand the universe the more it seems pointless. (You`ll find it in his book on the first three minutes).``

I don`t know if he`s a pessimist but he certainly is a realist. Whether we like it or not, our existence in the universe is pointless. The existence of the universe itself is pretty pointless. To suggest that the universe exists for the benefit of Allah`s/Ram`s/Jesus`s followers is a bunch of crap (not that that`s what you are suggesting, but that`s what a lot of people like to believe).

Being in the medical field, and having worked in one of the busy general hospitals in pakistan, i have seen cases which have been truly eye openers , reflecting on the modus operandi of our society , particularly in reference to the rural side .

When i was a final year student, i saw some of the most nerve shattering instances , that could ever present themselves.

I remember clearly that the average age of the tired, grey haired women , coming to deliver was somewhere between [45-55]. In todays world particularly the west , it is now no longer uncommon to see women having their first born at this age , infact it is announced with great pride and joy.

But there was no great pride and joy in what i saw , and what i heard . these women were married at a young age of 12- 15 yrs.

within this period , around their middle age , they had given birth to on an average 9-11 children.In between was inevitably a history of several miscarriages and still births.

When adviced on contraception there faces , now no longer fearful, but numbed into boldness, would teasingly reply back ``tu fir humra mian doosri kar ley ga ``.This just reflected how insecure they felt, and were ready to put up with anything to let their marriage going .

one day i remember having a lady , probably in her midfifties deliver with great difficulty .It was a challenge to keep her and the baby both alive by the atending Drs. She had haemorrhaged profusely .Her vital signs ,were resucitated with great difficulty .After 2 hrs. of intense management , we were able to stabilize her .During the visiting hrs.of the hospital her husband , an older man in his mid 60`s probably walks in . his wife has just delivered a baby . He is not interested in either the wellfare of the child or his wife .I was standing at the next bed filling out the progress chart. The man turns to his wife , and says ``cha bana dey ``. The woman with the i.v. lines in both arms ,feebly tries to slowly pull herself up, she does not refuse even at this stage , but is ready to oblige. When the husband is made aware of his wife`s critical condition , he growls even louder , ignoring the existence of the Drs. and slaps his wifes face , and says `` kaise nahin uthaie gee ``. This was not the first time that such scenes had been witnessed .

The point i am trying to relay is that in scenarious like this , one cannot blame either of the spouces . like the saying goes ``It takes two to clap ``. The husband had a wife ready to oblige him dutifully , and the wife had a man, who she could call her husband , a figure without whom she would be lost in the society, and left without an identity , which for her was very precious, and she was able to resist all the pit falls that came with the package deal in her marriage.

We were dazed with what we saw , but the lucky husband got a hot cup of tea, the woman was very happy to make it for him.

I think it also boils down to priorities which the woman may choose for herself, whether out of her own good nature , or fear of loosing him, or mabe even out of genuine love .

i find it very difficult to take sides , after being a witness to such brutality , and furthermore with what ease the scene was concluded . As i moved on, there was a couple smiling, happy as if they were blessed with all the goodness one could hope for.

However later , i could not resist and asked her why she did this , even after being put to shame by being slapped , in front of the entire ward .

she looked at me mockingly, and laughed a happy laugh, making me feel so ignorant and said ``Dr. sahib, woh humra admi hai, hum kaise us ko chai bana key nahin deta, woh hum sey khana bhi mangta to hum to uth key chappati daal deta ``.I at that moment felt the genuiness in her voice , so after that day have not questioned this topic.

Shirin

PM #227

As Iqbal said.

Aik Hi Sub Ka Nabi, Din Bhi Eeman Bhi Aik.

Harme Paak Bhi Allah Bhi Qura`an Bhi Aik.

Kuch Bari Baat Thi Hote Jo Musalmaan Bhi Aik.

Love for prophet PBUH and respect of Koran is deeply entrenched.

Not the same with Islam, because of tumultuous history of Muslims and use of Islam for personal gains all over the centuries.

Moreover many things like Hadith are controversial among Muslims from complete denial of Hadith by ``Korani`` to a sacred status for Hadith almost after Koran.

So on God Koran and Prophet all Muslims are one. After that they fight even on how to pray and how to give Zakaat.

Here is another organization that is trying to do
something (received via Dr. Riffat Hassan):


ISLAMABAD WOMEN`S WELFARE AGENCY (IWWA) an Intro.

IWWA MISSION
To rehabilitate uprooted, tortured and sexually assaulted women in society;
and enable them to take part in nation-building task as working citizens
with dignity, honor and pride.


BACKGROUND
Exploitation of socio-legal rights, especially of women, is too widespread
in our society that serious combat efforts are needed to this evil. But the
hard rock remains that unlike the developed states, under-developed
countries have to face never ending hurdles in their society with limited
resources. Most of our women are not aware of their socio-legal as well as
religious rights. Gender based violence or violence against women is
increasingly becoming a real and major problem in Pakistan. It is different
from other forms of violence because a social stigma is attached with it.
The roots of this issue are linked with our social norms, which define
society of two genders without having equal status. Family violence is often
accepted in our community in which it is overlooked by authorities or even
condoned on grounds of `honour` tradition or religion.

ISLAMABAD WOMEN`S WELFARE AGENCY (IWWA)
IWWA is committed to protection of the rights of women and has been working
since 1991 on the issues of domestic and sexual violence against women in
Rawalpindi and Islamabad. Initially, it started working as an Advocacy Group
without any financial support. But in 1999 Asia Foundation agreed with its
main objective and a partnership was developed by both the organizations for
the period of two years. Under this program, IWWA is running the projects of
Legal Aid Program (LAP) and Counselling Program (CP), including telephone
Help Line service for women in need. Under the project of LAP, IWWA provides
free legal aid to women. Its lawyer handles the cases in courts and rescues
the victims. It also organizes paralegal workshops for students and social
workers. Through CP, a counselling officer deals with the cases of women of
mental disorders because of domestic or other problems. They are also
referred to doctors or hospitals. In this limited time IWWA has tried its
best to identify the basic problems of women of Islamabad and sister City
and provide services accordingly.

Another accumulation of IWWA was developed with the Action Aid from July to
December 1999. It was a pilot project named `` Awareness Raising and Training
Program``. The objective was to create awareness in the community about
gender relationships and their differential impacts on women and to
sensitize them about the nature, types, range and causes of violence against
women and problems they faced in police stations. Under this project IWWA is
duty-bound to organize four workshops in the community of poor. The target
group consists of housewives, working women, students, police and social
workers. IWWA and Action Aid are also planning to organize such training as
an ``Action Research`` in Bahawalnagar.

IWWA has sufficiently fulfilled its promises with its donors and got outputs
even before the set time line. It has been working against the myth of
female inferiority propagated essentially through the dominant approach of
cultural violence against women, as is usually practiced. Because of
cultural and religious constraints and the complex dynamics surrounding
violence against women, particularly sexual abuse, not many organizations
are willing to take up such issues. Many people are not even willing to
acknowledge the existence of this problem. Whenever women victims of
violence have tried to speak out, they have been threatened, punished, and
ostracized from their homes and communities, and even subjected to more
abuse in custody by the police, and have faced discrimination from the legal
system.

IWWA is one of the few organizations in Pakistan that focuses on sexual
abuse and domestic violence against women. IWWA was founded in 1991 and is
registered under the social registration and control ordinance 1961. IWWA
provides psychological treatment assistance to the victims and survivors.
Presently, we are working on following projects:

? Legal Aid Program (LAP)
? Psychological Counselling (CP)
? Help Line Service (HLS)
? Awareness Raising and Training Project (ART)
? Research and Publications (RAP)

PM #225

If you think that that’s how we should address the issue, I won’t stand in you way… As a student of religion, I don’t agree with your approach at all. However, I am sure you can find plenty of people like hamidm and solitude who would be very impressed with your stance…

sadna #199

Your statement:

“While subject to universal condemnation, intellectual honesty would credit the system with preserving overall stability in Indian society and continuity of many cultural traditions including preservation of family and community. btw, these norms are so strong, their continuity is observed even among Christians, and apparently among Pakistani Muslims, too. These arguments in favor of preserving caste traditions could have been made anytime wrt to `collective good`.”

Excellent comments. I concur with you 100%. These traditions, however, have been subjected to very careful study/review in the past 100 – 150 years, and considerable effort has been made in India to rectify the situation so that our existing/current perceptions of morals, ethics, justice and fair-play are reflected in the socio-political construct of Indian society. Let me point out that the approach adopted by GOI and various social/political groups [to rectify the inequalities as a result of this system of segregation] did not involve condemning the upper cast Hindus as evil beings who should be slaughtered for what they have done to schedule casts in the last 1000 years or so. If such an approach were employed, India would have experienced a lot of bloodshed, and instability.

As for Pakistani Muslims, I don’t think that cast system was ever in place… not in the way that it has been in India. However, class-consciousness is found in all societies no matter what the Genni coefficient.

Your statement:

“But really, if any group of people is being treated inhumanly, firstly thats a norm not worth preserving, as Ras says `whatever the excuse`. The Taliban`s pure society is an example. If their own coutrymen are fleeinf the country in large numbers, what good are their injunctions? Is each one of these refugees `insulting Islam` or `tribal traditions` or showing disrespect for prevailign cultural norms by making this choice? “
I am not arguing for preservation of any tradition/custom (religious or otherwise), which is the cause of injustice/inhumanity in a society, and which stands in our face as a blatant violation of universally accepted standards of morals, ethics, and human rights. But what approach should we adopt? Do we condemn all Muslims on earth for what Talibans are doing in Afghanistan? Do we not listen to what Muslims have to say about the appalling human rights situation in Afghanistan? Are Talibans truly representing Islam when they stop women from going to schools/universities/work etc.? What do we know about rights of women in Islam? Should we rely on Solitude for our understanding of Islam (especially wrt to rights of women)? What kind of society is Afghanistan? We know that they claim to have a pure Islamic juris prudential society, but is it a civilized/moral society? Is it possible to conceive of a society, which claims to have implemented shariah law, but it is morally bankrupt?

It is interesting that only a few Islamic countries (I think only Pakistan and S Arabia) recognize Talibans as the legitimate rulers of Afghanistan. Why haven’t the Sunni world madly fallen in love with Talibans?
And as you say, their own countrymen are fleeing the country in large numbers… What does that tell you?

Your statement:

“Thirdly, the norm may be having a counterproductive effect wrt `collective good`. Say a law on adultery exists. It may deter the practice of adultery among some, leading to a `more moral` society as per the cultural norms. However the law may also allow a new and more pervasive and cultural norm of misuse and abuse to take root, thus defeating its original purpose. “

I will say it loud… the hudood ordinance in Pakistan is one such law. It defeats the purpose of keeping the individuals protected from unnecessary pervasiveness. It is unjust and immoral.

As for affirmative actions, I am not in favour of such laws/policies. Once implemented, they have a use by life beyond which the law of diminishing returns takes hold… it is not very difficult for a society to recognize when that point of diminishing return has reached… GOI, and Indian society as a whole, probably knows that affirmative action policies are no longer working – instead the society as a whole is losing. However, the politicians now risk a massive political price, and the society risks instability if these polices are to be scraped.

the problem lies with our perception of rape ... i have seen ppl laugh when a woman of bad repute reports rape ... they do not understand that if she sells her body it is her choice that still matters.

basically, if a woman`s right to her choice were accepted rape in ever shape and form would take on a different definition in our society.

Steven Weinberger is, to me, a profound pessimist, who wrote something to the effect that the more we understand the universe the more it seems pointless. (You`ll find it in his book on the first three minutes).

I wouldn`t take Professor Weinberger to be an expert on anything but physics.

-Arun Gupta

In #151, hamidm writes:

``the problem is that whereas most others know better and have turned their back on such silliness, the muslims, having been assured of the accuracy of the text by the the author himself, continue to take it seriously...... ``

In reponse, Mushtaq Farouqui in #162, and tahmed123 in #176 virtually garland him.

What am I to deduce from this? It`s tolerable for an ex-Muslim to ridicule Islam openly, but when others lambaste the Islamic apologists, they are promptly and repeatedly dubbed bigots and `self-righteous`

I don`t get it! Is this the cowardice that Urstruly is gibbering on about? Or is this the self-respect that the Resident bigot inquired about once??

Arun Gupta (#205) wrote:

``This generally nice Indian bloke presumably has greatly improved his prospects (or his father improved them ) through Science and Maths. It is therefore a natural question for him.``

My emphasis was on the air of superioirity in his manner. I don`t begrudge him his better prospects at all; I *do * find fault with the cultural arrogance, which I understand is not altogether a rare commodity in Silicon Valley.

rgds,

PM

Dear fairdinkum

re. #197, in which u write:

``This is not a good example of the threshold of subjectivity/variability of perceived constructiveness/destructiveness in an argument. This is ignorance… Plain and simple. If you ever have been a student of religion, you would not make such a statement Period...``

I think you just proved my point. Many, many students of religion *would * acknowledge that it is an ``invention`` of humans -- and is not the less for it either!

regards,

Pat

The link to the article hamidm quotes is in #222.

re ras siddiqui#220

Ras Siddiqui sahib, your write up is as always illuminating and, as it should be, shocking. Of course many on this board and society at large dismiss karo-kari as the work of uneducated masses who are ignorant and menieval etc etc.

What is, therefore, equally, horrifying is that Pakistan`s Senate, before its suspension, failed to condemn this act. Here was an august body made up of eminent lawyers, jurists, educators, and presided by an Oxford graduate. The motion to kill the resolution condemning honour killings was sponsored by none other than the supposedly `progressive` ANP of Wali Khan! When the elite of society cannot condemn sheer murder, who can be blamed?

Tajjub is baat pe hota hai ke this was the very society which once produced someone like the late Begum SHaista Suhrawardy Ikramullah (who recently went back to her Creator) and Princess Abida Sultana. Why the regress?

Chowk`s rationalists may find this interesting.

``Confessions of a Lonely Atheist``

http://www.nytimes.com/library/magazine/home/20010114mag-atheism.html

An excerpt from the article:

``So, I`ll out myself. I`m an Atheist. I don`t believe in God, Gods, Godlets or any sort of higher power beyond the universe itself, which seems quite high and powerful enough to me. I don`t believe in life after death, channeled chat rooms with the dead, reincarnation, telekinesis or any miracles but the miracle of life and consciousness, which again strike me as miracles in nearly obscene abundance. I believe that the universe abides by the laws of physics, some of which are known, others of which will surely be discovered, but even if they aren`t, that will simply be a result, as my colleague George Johnson put it, of our brains having evolved for life on this one little planet and thus being inevitably limited. I`m convinced that the world as we see it was shaped by the again genuinely miraculous, let`s even say transcendent, hand of evolution through natural selection.``

......... since we are still on the subject of how horrid organized religion is and the havoc it wrecks on the young and silly, let me quote from an from today`s NY times, a zionist propaganda rag which is still the only paper worth reading :

``Society bends over backwards to be accomodating to religious sensibilities but not to other kinds of sensibilities. If I say something offensive to religious people, I`ll be universally censured, including by many atheists. But if I say something insulting about Democrats or Republicans or the Green Party, one is allowed to get away with that. Hiding behind the smoke screen of untouchability is something religions have been allowed to get away with for too long.`` - Richard Dawkins, evolutionary biologist.

........ now in my own words : i think religious folk, regardless of which god they worship, are a bunch of turkeys stuffed with their own kaka....... they strut around the world led by senile half-naked faqirs or doddering idiots in funny hats or bearded devils with oversized turbans or con-men with black hats, all ready to do battle to establish His kingdom .......

....... hopefully science and a little common sense will save us from going off the deep end ...

`` It`s a consequence of the experience of science as you learn more and more about the universe, you find you can understand more and more without any reference to supernatural intervention, so yu loose interest in that possibility. Most scientists I know don`t care enough about religion even to call themselves atheists. And, that, I think, is one of the great things about science - that it has made it possible for people not to be religious ``- Steven Weinberg, Nobel laureate in Physics

........ so I continue to pick up my children early from sunday school, making sure they don`t get overexposed to dogma based on fear, supersition and hate of the other ....... i correct them when they say silly things like,`` the christians are misled and they changed their books`` or `` saying that christ is the son of god is shirk`` or ``the hindus are hell-bound because they worship idols`` ....... and of course we happily break kosher laws by eating big-macs and whoppers - like someone said, ``my children`s belief`s are their own, and as long as those beliefs do not require you to kill your parents, they are okay with me.``

....... now, some wise-guy is surely going to ask why do i bother to send my kids to sunday school -it is all about testosterone defficiency and world peace ......

Here is a sample of the work done by one organization that I had mentioned in my earlier
replies:

January 14, 2001

EDITOR`S NOTE: The following report and digest was compiled for the
INRFVVP by Kate DeBusschere and Makesha Koestel. We thank our
volunteers for their good work.

BACKGROUND:

``KARO-KARI CLAIMED 264 LIVES LAST YEAR`` states an article from the
March 24, 2000 edition of DAWN. These `honor` killings were committed in
the province of Sindh in 1999. The article gives the numbers of deaths
for each region, and focuses in particular on the illustrative story of
Deeba Shaw. Deeba, a 15 year-old-girl and resident of Z-260-A Chenaser
Goth, got married to her neighbor, Urs Khaskheli, without the knowledge
of her family. A family meeting was called, in which Deeba was named as
Kari, and Urs as Karo. Deeba was then shot dead by her family members.
Her uncle and cousin were taken into custody. Urs fled after hearing the
reports of his wife`s murder. Though the article says that 264 lives
were taken last year, there were many more that went unreported. Both
the HRCP, as well as Amnesty International reported that more than 1,000
lives were, in fact, lost.
In an article entitled ``IT`S TIME TO BURY THE KARO-KARI CUSTOM,`` by
Shahid Ali Seehar appearing in the June 15, 2000 edition of Dawn, the
author equates the tradition of karo-kari with the inhumane conditions
for women during pre-Islamic Arabia. The author makes the point that
Islam is against all forms of gender discrimination. Furthermore, the
Qur`an says the woman is a precious gift from Allah, and is equal to man
in every way. The author suggests that the government must play a role
in abolishing honor crimes. Early marriages should be legally banned and
authorities must be instructed to investigate and prosecute karo-kari
murders. Seehar commends General Musharraf on condemning honor crimes as
first rate murder, but contends that we must work further to do away
with this awful practice.

According to the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, ``Over 1000 honor
killings take place every year in Pakistan and, in the Punjab alone, at
least 700 women are raped each year,`` as reported in an article of the
May 31, 2000 edition of DAWN newspaper,``1000 HONOUR KILLINGS EVERY YEAR:
REPORT.`` The article aptly makes the point that this practice of `honor`
killings is unjustified and unacceptable for the people of Pakistan.
Women are being killed because they choose to utilize their law-given
right to marry whom they wish, and family members supersede the law by
murdering them extra judiciously, often by using the horrid method of
stove burning. So, those women who are not killed by the assailant
(often a close relative, such as a father, spouse, brother, or in-law),
are most often disfigured and sentenced to a life of suffering and
estrangement.

The Women`s Action Forum (WAF) says it is not willing to stand by any
longer while this inhumane practice continues to plague their nation.
The WAF is reported as stating, ``Undoubtedly, this violence and
harshness against women is due becoming increasingly brutal,
exploitative and harsh of our society, as well as women`s subhuman
status. This is in spite of the fact that they have equal rights under
the constitution of Pakistan.``

The article also highlights the story of Shaheen Akhter, an unfortunate
fifteen-year-old girl who was raped and then imprisoned for her
so-called ``crime.`` However, her rapists were not arrested. While in
prison she contracted tuberculosis and was denied health care. She died
of tuberculosis in prison while in fetters, which were outlawed as
inhumane by General Musharraf before her arrest. Prison conditions, and
the treatment of inmates are exceedingly inhumane. Women are subject to
sexual abuse, torture, and all forms of maltreatment by their wardens
and others when imprisoned. (NOTE: THE STORY OF SHAHEEN AKHTAR HAS BEEN
COVERED BY THE INRFVVP IN DETAIL IN ITS POSTINGS)

``All consensual extramarital sexual relations are considered violations
of the Hudood Ordinances, which carry either Hadd (Koranic) or Tazir
(secular) punishments. Accordingly, if a woman cannot prove the absence
of consent, there is a risk that she may be charged with a violation of
the Hudood ordinances for fornication or adultery.


Please contact INRFVVP for the full article...

Ras

KRashid,

I`ve never asked him what became of his daughter. Another Indian told me never to do it because he`s so humiliated that he breaks down into sobs if that subject ever comes up.

I heard that his daughter lives with her husband somewhere in Detroit. She`s given up college & works pattime somewhere to pay her way through school. Her parents have excommunicated her.

The irony is that he acts like she has humiliated the family. IMO it was the family who humiliated her.

macgupta,

It was a Lutheran church .Of couse I wont send her to Sunday school that looks down upon other religions. Only a tiny fraction of Christian denominations are fundamentalists. Most are quite liberal IMO.

Solitude #194 #195 #196: I dont expect Solitude to pay any attention to what I have written here, so this post is only for any individual whose idea of combining fun and education is to have read his monotonous soliloquies: These posts represent a basic misperception of Islam. That misperception is that Islam is what the mullah says it is. However, both Solitude and the fundamentalists conveniently ignore the fact that the mullah has no place in Islam. It is like representing the thoughts of Thackarey as representing as Hinduism; or the thoughts of some KKK nut and representing that as American democracy.

I use this opportunity once again to express my regrets that the important subject of this article has been hi-jacked by Solitude in exploiting the topic of harrassment of women to further his own agenda of denigrating Islam. And I regret that my own posts have added to the mess thus created by trying to keep the record straight.

Solitude #197, ``Thank you, good luck and may we someday live to see a world free of submission (Islam)``

Thank you, good luck, and may we someday live to see a world free of propaganda spreading hatemongers like you who have no respect for people`s religions or beliefs. May we someday live to see a world free of people criticizing each other`s faith and invoking hatred and negativity in each other. May we live in peace and harmony and celebrate our religions and the positive aspects of our religions, whatever those may be. May we eat celebrate Eid, Diwali, Christmas, and Hanukkah together without having people like you give us heartburn.

Re: dost

``Gender selection, though illegal, is still practised in India. But would you be surprised to know that ex-patriates in North America are also sometimes doing the same?``

A lot of NRIs are the worst. They live frozen in the 1970s India they left behind and have some deluded vision of what is Indian and what is not. Plus, they raise these sexually repressed children by promising to have a wife shipped to them from India when they are old enough...so no dating.

Re: scout

``As long as abusive relationships don`t occur in a marriage and extended family, the Eastern culture of family support is much healthier for our emotional well being.``

Extended families? Do you know what that is all about? It`s the evil mother-in-law commanding an army of her sons` wives to cook, clean, wash, rear kids (sons if they want preferential treatment), make chai for the fat father-in-law and be suffocated if they ever express individuality.

``Eastern elderly men and women have a great, respectful status in the family while their Western counterparts are ``put away`` in a nursing home.``

That`s a big generalization. Yeah, some of them are put away unhappily at nursing homes. But a lot of them live longer, healthier, and happier lives as individuals. Ever seen a 70-year-old woman go crazy at a shopping mall? Or put on make-up and go on a date b.c. she`s widowed and lonely? They have social security, medicare, and other benefits. The elders in our countries couldn`t dream of these benefits...the wealthy don`t have to worry but the poor (majority) wither away and die painfully. Some respect that is...

Re: Solitude

I for one don`t know all the details of Islam like you do. Hence I can just urge you to keep educating us. Only you can provide all the quotes, insight from experience, etc. Plus, when you write it, it makes Urstruly jump atop the mosque and scream even louder because you are/were part of the religion.

Re: eg_brahmin

``I know my post didn`t cater to your sole interest of sneering and criticizing Pakistan as well as denouncing Islam. Tough luck my friend, and I`d only suggest you to wait.``

Don`t be offended. That wasn`t my intention. Just a request to be more concise. If you & shankar want to bring out your personal laundry on Chowk, that`s your business I suppose.

How about this one? In the most recent Outlook India. Also check out the editorial in the latest Friday Times

Religious zealots are stung to the quick as a court bans fatwas

Arshad Mahmud in Dhaka

There was a perceptible sense of optimism and joy on the streets of Dhaka this New Year`s day when the Bangladesh High Court, in a path-breaking judgement, declared all fatwas illegal. Human rights activists were jubilant because the judgement, they say, was a decisive blow to the menace of religious fundamentalism in the country. Within hours, the celebrations had spilled on to the streets.

But the response of fundamentalist leaders, expectedly, was equally swift and forceful. The same day, Maulana Fazlul Haque Amini, a self-proclaimed religious guru, declared Justices Golam Rabbani and Najmun Ara Sultana, who had delivered the verdict, murtad or infidels. Describing their judgement as un-Islamic, Amini called upon believers to take immediate action against the judges, interpreted widely as a call to eliminate them.

The judgement was pronounced after Justices Rabbani and Sultana took up the case of Shahida Begum, a poor divorced housewife in a remote village in northern Nawgaon district, who was forced by an impromptu religious court to marry another man in order to revive her first marriage. Her story was first published by Banglabazaar Patrika, a local newspaper.

Shahida had to go through hila nikah, a humiliating process in which a divorced woman can live with her husband again only after marrying another man and getting a divorce after consummating her second marriage. Shahida`s first husband, Saiful Islam, had divorced her following an altercation. Though he later regretted his decision, saying he did it in a fit of temper, the religious court`s fatwa decreed the marriage was no longer valid. With no legal protection, Shahida had to marry another man, albeit for a short time, in order to come back to Saiful.

Incensed and shocked at the incident, the High Court panel not only took suo motu action but also ordered the local administration to arrest Azizul Haque, the cleric who had issued the fatwa. In its verdict, the court ruled that Bangladesh Parliament must enact appropriate laws prescribing severe punishment for those who issue fatwas, that schools and madrasas must include the Muslim Family Law in textbooks to underline the un-Islamic nature of fatwas, and that imams must preach at Friday congregations about the pernicious effects of edict-like fatwas. (Traditionally, fatwas are an alim or a scholar`s interpretations of Islamic laws that Muslims sought for removing their confusion.)

Says Ayesha Khanam, general secretary of the Bangladesh Women Council: ``The verdict was our best gift on the New Year`s day. It`s a victory for all helpless women in our country.`` Argues Dr Kamal Hossain, an eminent jurist who was instrumental in persuading the judges to rule against the clerics: ``Fatwas are unconstitutional and against the fundamental rights.``

But there are many pessimists too. Many say the verdict is unlikely to end repression against women in a country where they still play a subservient role and where semi-literate religious leaders, especially in rural areas, rule the roost. The response of fundamentalists too has added to their fear.

The verdict, however, has emboldened several victims to demand punishment against fatwa-happy local clerics. In the last one week alone, there have been at least a dozen newspaper reports of religious leaders fleeing their villages to escape the rising tide of public anger against them.

Determined women activists want the verdict to be implemented, saying that it has come after years of struggle. The first public outcry was spurred by the blood-curdling case of Noorjahan Begum, a poor housewife in a remote village in northeastern Sylhet district, who was issued a fatwa in 1993. She was buried alive up to her waist and stoned 101 times for allegedly committing adultery. Noorjahan survived the stoning, but she committed suicide that same night.

The perpetrators of this crime could never be brought to justice in the absence of any law to deal with fatwas.

The recent judgement, many feel, has plugged the lacuna because the judges have asked the administration to take immediate cognisance of fatwa-related incidents anywhere in the country and take appropriate action against the perpetrators.

With religious leaders deciding to appeal against the High Court verdict, the judicial coup against fundamentalism would be complete if the Supreme Court were to uphold the judgement of January 1.

To Shankar : what if the religious instruction given your daughter in Sunday School teaches her that Hindus and Muslims and Jews are an inferior kind of people ? Would you be so sanguine then ? (e.g., it is not beyond the realm of possibility that the Sunday school is Southern Baptist).

Just curious,

-Arun Gupta

PM wrote :

``Just last night, at home wathcing PBS, there was a programme on musical education in inner city schools. A remark by my roommate (a generally nice Indian bloke) sums up the attitude most have: ``What`s the use of all this music and Arts education if they can`t do well in Science and Maths?`` he quipped, not without some superority in tone.``

This generally nice Indian bloke presumably has greatly improved his prospects (or his father improved them ) through Science and Maths. It is therefore a natural question for him.

-Arun Gupta

Methinks too many people in this thread think that self-excoriation makes for virtue.

-----

-arun gupta

Solitude #196

When I was a bit young, my sister was in Islami Jamiat Talibat (Tulaba). We had heated discussion. And Her ending would always be. But what is the fault of Islam in this.

I think you are right to some extent.

4:34 Ayah in my opinion, since I am married for 10 years is a very good advise and not at all related to wife beating etc as far as my understanding goes. Quran is not only related to laws, but fear of God etc. And once the fear of God is gone in our relationship with other people, then what remains is RELIGION Islam and wife beating.

As I have mentioned in another post, Umar RZAH distributed the booty to conquered people in disregard with Quranic injunction.

As you have mentioned clearly the Ayah, that requirement of two women as witness is related to if one errs. That err part is gone from Fiqh.

Moreover you are trying to see a seventh century Arabian society with the eye of 20th century libertarian.

Two incidences will probably give some insight.

1- One a testimony by someone from Quraish (I think Umar RZAH) that Quraish women were under control of their husbands, but when they came in contact with Medina women who enjoyed more liberty, their behaviour also changed so that they started answering back to their husband.

2- A Sahabi told his wife not to attend the Khutba in mosque. His wife told him that, it is allowed by prophet PBUH and therefore he cannot stop it.

Umar RZAH was definitely a strict and pious person. If you remember the Hadith that women were talking freely in the presence of Prophet PBUH, but when they saw Umar RZAH they became more alert and kept silence (or something of sort) and prophet PBUH smiled on this.

You cannot take away the society and its culture and see it in isolation.

I have mentioned in another post, that we should see the application of Islam as in that society.

For example four witness requirement means, strong prooof and not to pumish on hearsay or flimsy grounds (many times it happens in USA and a lot of cases are coming to light). Particularly libel and slander is as much a crime as crime itself.

I am definitely with you on our bigoted popes and church, but on Koran I have different attitude.

Lets see if there are any Islamist to respond you. Because I found no courage to defend the indefensible.

Solitude:

well...wait...I`ll come back with some thing.

take care till then

Aurangzeb Haneef

Shankar #183

What is the end of story.

Meaning how did the parents reacted?

Latif Champu #181

Wha---t??????? :-)

Ursruly,

No problem bro. Please feel free to insult hinduism & hindus however loudly and as many times as you want. You dont really need an excuse to do it or say ``someone else is responsible, so I`m going to do it``.

As far as I`m concerned I dont mind your hindu bashing at all. In fact I find your posts very entertaining. I`d hate it if you ever left Chowk. I just jabbed you cos I just enjoy messing with your mind:)

Just because somebody hates or insults my religion doesnt mean I should be devastated by it. My religion is between me & my God. Why should I mind or care if someone else hates it? Same should go for you too. Correct me if I`m wrong. If anyone blasphemes your religion, you believe they will be in for some heavy duty punishment at the hands of God, dont you? So why are you getting your nose out of joint if they want to apply for a visa to hell? Does their ranting ever change your opinion of Islam?!--I should think not!

I might be misunderstanding you regarding the term ``coward``. Coward implies somebody is frightened of something. Could you clarify what this ``fear`` is? Maybe tomorrow OK? its time for my midnite shot of cow urine.

Mushtaq, I`ve interacted with you by email and have read some of your thoughts. I want to ask you on this board what your thoughts are about the posts of solitude and if you might respond to them. I don`t know of his reasons for trying to create so much hatred for Islam, but I for one do not think he is doing it out of personal hatred. I could be wrong, but this smells! This is too specific an attack for it to be an individuals effort, and for sure he has spent a huge amount of time only for the purpose of trying to create hatred for Islam. So if he or some organization is behind this, I would like to ask you and others to present your views on Islam. The reason I am asking this is that there are others reading the posts who are ignorant of the real Islam and could very well mistake solitudes views as truth.

How about it?

scout;

{{The lack of family love and support shocked me. Sure there are exceptions, but the average American middle class grandmother/grandfather lives in a nursing home.}}

I`ve worked in US hospitals & nursing homes for 20 yrs now. A large percentage of my practice is senior citizens. Let me tell you, everytime a senior citizen is put in a nursing home, you cant imagine the pain & heartache I see in their children.

In an average middle class American family, both husband & wife have to work to make ends meet. Besides they cant afford servants like the average middle class Indo-Pak family. I`m assuming most of us have come from middle class backgrounds, at least. Heck we had servants for everything back home. Let me tell you its a heck of a lot easier to take care of an elderly parent in our respective countries than the US.

If labor was that cheap in the US, most nursing homes would close down. I have held many an American hand & learnt their pain when their parents were in a nursing home. They love their parents just as much as we do.

The concept of ``respect`` is different in the West (at least in the US--I dont know about Europe). The difference is cultural. It is different--whether it is better or worse depends upon who is judging. In the West ``respect`` isnt automatically granted just because of your station in life. So teachers, older people, national leaders etc arent automatically respected because their ``status``. Respect, in the West has to be earned, not demanded . Commedians like Jay Leno & David Letterman are ``brutally`` irreverant to the national leaders. Indians have commented that it is disrespectful. What is considered appropriate manners in the West may be misconstrued as ill mannered in India. For instance, all my kid`s friends call me by my first name. On the other hand we tell our kids to call their friends` parents as Uncle this or Aunty that. I remember my kid coming home to me very mad when I reminded her call her friend`s father Uncle Mike. ``Dad! he looked at me & started laughing--I felt like such a dork!``

So even though Americans can be remarkably informal & at times irreverent to us, it doesnt necessary mean we our manners are better or worse--just different.

Scout#91

You say,``Eastern elderly men and women have a great, respectful status in the family while their Western counterparts are ``put away`` in a nursing home.``

May be you are right. Perhaps my vision is blurred after witnessing too many incidents in which the grown-up children feigned respect for their old parents only to seize their property. And once their purpose was over, the poor old parents were abused and humiliated till their death. Western old folks might suffer isolation, loneliness but I guess they are able to lead their life with some dignity because of social security.

Still you have a point. There are times when I think that blatant consumerism although good from a materialistic point of view, tends to reduce human beings into inanimate objects. Individualism, if carried to extreme, may again promote loneliness, and isolation. And nothing is worse than loneliness if you know what it feels like. There is a need to understand how the value systems evolve over time. And a need to achieve an optimum balance for the overall satisfaction. I know, I have become very vague and subjective in this post, contrary to my nature. Such things infact require some deep introspection.

Sincerely

fairdinkum #174
``Also, due care and intellecutual honesty demands that all other factors such as cultural norms and certain traditions which a society may force upon individuals as necessary for collective/common good (keep the family together at all costs, for example) are subjected to rigerous study and review without necessarily apportioning blame or adopting a confrontional approach towards a certain group, school of thought or belief.``

fairdinkum, the rigidity of the caste system was the prevailing cultural norm in Indian society for at least the last 1000 years. While subject to universal condemnation, intellectual honesty would credit the system with preserving overall stability in Indian society and continuity of many cultural traditions including preservation of family and community. btw, these norms are so strong, their continuity is observed even among Christians, and apparently among Pakistani Muslims, too. These arguments in favor of preserving caste traditions could have been made anytime wrt to `collective good`.

But really, if any group of people is being treated inhumanly, firstly thats a norm not worth preserving, as Ras says `whatever the excuse`. The Taliban`s pure society is an example. If their own coutrymen are fleeinf the country in large numbers, what good are their injunctions? Is each one of these refugees `insulting Islam` or `tribal traditions` or showing disrespect for prevailign cultural norms by making this choice?

And often the issue is not religion or tradition, its `temporal` expedience such as in the Taliban`s injunctions, if I am not mistaken.

Thirdly, the norm may be having a counterproductive effect wrt `collective good`. Say a law on adultery exists. It may deter the practice of adultery among some, leading to a `more moral` society as per the cultural norms. However the law may also allow a new and more pervasive and cultural norm of misuse and abuse to take root, thus defeating its original purpose.

Sadhana

PS: Actually a similar effect is seen with the affirmative action laws in India. While members of a recognised `disadvantaged` caste do get benefits they might not have otherwise(allowing them bridge the gap created by traditional disadvantages), such a system also unwittingly encourages the preservation of caste distinctions.

PM #185

[My friend fairdinkum calls for ``constructive criticism only`` when dealing with these matters, forgetting that the threshold of perceived contructiveness in an argument is completely subjective and variable. As an example, take your statement above: ``...we`ve forgotten why religion was ``invented`` by human beings in the first place.``]

This is not a good example of the threshold of subjectivity/variability of perceived constructiveness/destructiveness in an argument. This is ignorance… Plain and simple. If you ever have been a student of religion, you would not make such a statement Period...

Unfortunately, discourse/discussion on subtleties of subjectivity in arguments and rhetoric (as in philosophy) is beyond the scope of this forum. So I wouldn`t even worry about elaborating on that.

Thanks.

For those who appreciate my contribution - please do not risk the legitimacy of your arguments by supporting me. Your arguments and the cause is more important than your support for me.

Individuals have always stood apart and above men who persecute in numbers. The fundamentalist and the fanatic will always attack in packs. The Islamist always has a ``jamaat`` (a party) and ``families`` (like gangsters) and like minded clones. They are the antithesis of individuality. They hunt in packs and prowl in groups. Their downfall will be the house of cards they occupy.

You will help more if you produced your arguments without as much as a mention of my name or hint of solidarity with my views. I am in no need for your support or kind words. My strength is in my individuality.

Thank you, good luck and may we someday live to see a world free of submission (Islam)

Shiraz

How Islam advocates violence against women :

It states in Chapter 4:34:

``As for these from women, fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart and scourge them.``

Without ANY exception, all the Qur’anic commentators agree upon the meaning of this verse because it is so obvious. In their famous commentary, page 69, the Jalalan said:

``Those of you who are afraid of their disobedience which symptoms become evident to you, threaten them with the fear of God and banish them to beds apart and scourge them.``

The Zamakhshari reiterates the same opinion (al-Kash-Shaf Vol. 1, p. 524). Both Imam Baydawi (p. 111), and Al-Tabari (p.92) repeat the same explanation. If we also search Ahkamal-Qur’an (the Ordinances of the Qur’an) by the Imam Shafi’i (Vol. 1, p.211), we read:

``In case of a husband’s ill-treatment [of his spouse], the Qur’an permits reconciliation of the spouses and arbitration, but in the case of the wife it allows scourging her.``

At the inception of Islam, we come across a very famous incident which all the Muslim chroniclers record (refer to Imam al-Nawawi: Riyad al-Salihin, ``The Orchards of Righteous Men``, p. 107-108),

``Umar Ibn al-Khattab came to Muhammad saying, ‘Women have dared to disobey husbands.’ He allowed their husbands to scourge them. Many women approached Muhammad complaining against their husbands because Muhammad received a verse for the Qur’an which commands their husbands to scourge them.``

In the Kash-shaf (the revealer) of al-Zamakhshari (Vol. 1, p. 525), we read the following,

``On the authority of Muhammad (peace and blessing of Allah be upon him), he said: ‘Hang up your whips in a place where your wife (or wives) can see it.’

Also, on the authority of Asmaa the daughter of Abu Bakar Siddique:

``I was the fourth wife (among four) of al-Zabayr Ibn al-Awwam. Whenever he became angry at one of us he struck us with a hook rod until it was broken.``

This hemistich was composed by al-Zabayr:

``If it were not for her children, I would have hit her.``

The command to scourge women is repeated in Sahih al-Bukhari, ``The Sound Tradition of al-Bukhari`` (Vol. 7, p. 100). Ponder for a moment over Muhammad’s order to the husband: ``Hang up your scourge where your wife can see it.`` This is intimidation and threat, as if a husband were telling his wife: ``Beware of disobedience, for this is the whip which is ready to fall upon you!``

There is no security or love in Muhammad’s words or in the deeds of al-Zubair Ibn al-Awwam, who was a relative of Muhammad, one of his companions, and one of those models whom every Muslim imitates and vies with all over the world. He was one of the ten whom Muhammad assured of paradise and one of the six whom Umar recommended for the Caliphate. This man used to scourge his wife until the wooden hook was broken, as Asmaa (the daughter of Abu Bakr al Saddique who was one of his four wives) tells us. Is there greater wife abuse than that?


All contemporary scholars attest to this fact which is obvious in the Qur’an. In the book, ``You Ask and Islam Answers`` (p. 94 for example), Abdul–latif Mushtahiri says,

``If admonishing and sexual desertion fail to bring forth results and the woman is of a cold and stubborn type, the Qur’an bestows on man the right to straighten her out by way of punishment and beating provided he does not break her bones nor shed blood. Many a wife belongs to this querulous type and requires this sort of punishment to bring her to her senses!``

In his book, ``The Individual Guarantee In the Islamic Law`` (p. 63), Ahmad Ahmad, a professor at the college of Law at the University of Qatar, denotes the following under the title of ``Family Problems’ Solution``,

``If a woman is afraid that her husband may turn away from her or detest her, she will hasten to bring understanding and reconciliation. But if the husband is afraid that his wife may rebel against him, he hastens to bring mutual understanding by means of exhortation, then by abandonment of the bed, then by the scourging which deters.``

``By the scourging which deters`` This is if the symptoms of disobedience became apparent exactly as the Jalalan, Baydawi, Zamakhshari have said and as the Saudi scholars indicated in Al-Muslimun magazine in its issue of March 17, 1989 (page 12).

I can also easily list dozens of references, both ancient and contemporary, which explain this verse (4:34). Actually, it does not need any exposition because it is self-explanatory—"and scourge them.``

According to the Islamic faith and by distinct orders issued by the Qur’an and Muhammad, a man is allowed to scourge his wife with a peaceful conscience because he is carrying out God’s command as recorded in the Qur’an. ``God the compassionate, the Merciful`` and the Glorious Qur’an—and Muhammad, the prophet of mercy and humanity who claimed that he honored women, yet said: ``Hang up your scourge where your wife can see it.``

--

Now men, be men for a change. Stand up and be honest with yourselves. Absolving Islam or excusing Islam will not bring about change. Trying to twist the meanings of the words (from the traditional and orthodox and authentic Islam) will only serve the orthodox Islamists.

Let us first confront our own fears, let us first be good and generous men and then let us allow the goodness in us to rise from years of indoctrination in Islam. I believe half the men who defend Islam are deeply anti woman.

``Get two witnesses, out of your own men, and if there are not two men, then a man and two women, such as ye choose, for witnesses, so that if one of the two women errs (through forgetfullness), the other can remind her. ``

[``Is not the evidence (testimony) of a woman equal to half the evidence of a man?`` ``This is because of the deficiency of your minds (mental status).`` Sahih of al-Bukhari (Vol. l, p. 83) ]


Islam protects rapists, for a woman who has been raped often finds herself charged with adultery or fornication. To prove ``zina``, four adult males of good repute must be present to testify that sexual penetration has taken place. Furthermore, in keeping with good Islamic practice, laws value the testimony of men over women.

The combined effect of these is that it is impossible for a woman to bring a successful charge of rape against a man, instead, she herself, the victim, finds herself charged with illicit intercourse, while the rapist goes free. (Islamic logic says : ``If you were not raped and you cannot prove that - what with the odds piled against you, then you must have comitted adultery``) If the rape results in a pregnancy it is automatically taken as an admission that adultery or fornication has taken place with the woman`s consent rather than that rape has occurred.

Here are some sample cases.

In a town in the northern province of Punjab, a woman and her two daughters were stripped naked, beaten, and gang- raped in public, but the police did nothing to pursue the case.

A thirteen-year-old girl was kidnapped and raped by a ``family friend.`` Her father brought a case against the rapist, it was the girl who was put in jail and charged with ``zina,`` illegal sexual intercourse. The father managed to secure child`s release by bribing the police. The traumatized child was then severely beaten for disgracing the family honor.

A fifty-year-old widow, Ahmedi Begum, decided to let some rooms house in the city of Lahore to two young veiled women. As she was about to show them the rooms, the police burst into the courtyard of the house and arrested the two girls and Ahmedi Begum`s nephew who had simply been standing there.

Later that afternoon, Ahmedi Begum went to the police station with her son-in-law to inquire about her nephew and the two girls. The police told her they were arresting her too. They confiscated her jewelry and pushed her into another room. While she was waiting, the police officers shoved the two sisters naked and bleeding, into the room and then proceeded to rape them again in front of the widow (Ahmedi Begum).

When Ahmedi covered her eyes, the police forced her to watch by pulling her arms to her sides. After suffering various sexual humiliations, Ahmedi herself was stripped and raped by one officer after another.

They dragged her outside where she was again beaten. One of the officers forced a policeman`s truncheon, covered with chili paste, into her rectum, rupturing it. Ahmedi screamed in horrible agony and fainted, only to wake up in prison, chargea wth zina. Her case was taken up by a human rights lawyer. She was released on bail after three months m prison, but was not acquitted until three years later.

In the meanume, her son-in-law divorced her daughter because of this shame.

Was this an solated case? Unfortunately no. The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan said in its annual report that one woman is raped every three hours in Pakistan and one in two rape victims is a juvenile.

According to Womens Action Forum, a woman`s rights organization, 72 percent of all women in police custody in Pakistan are physically and sexually abused. Furthermore, 75 percent of all women in jail are there under charges of zina.

Many of these women remain m Jail awaiting trial for years.

In other words, the charge of zina is casually applied by any man who wants to get rid of his wife. The wife is immediately arrested, and kept waiting in prison sometimes for years.

Before the introduction of these Islamic laws the total number of women in prison was 70; the present number is more than 3000. Most of these women have been charged under the Zina or Hudood Ordinances.

Safia Bibi, a virtually blind sixteen-year-old domestic, was raped by her landlord and his son. As a result, she became pregnant and later gave birth to an illegitimate child. Though her father brought a case against the men, they were acquitted since there were not the requisite number of maie witnesses. However, Safia`s pregnancy was proof of fornication and she was accordingly sentenced to three years` imprisonment, fifteen lashes, and a fine of a thousand rupees. The Judge smugly stated that he had given a light sentence in view of her age and near blindness.

Happily, public pressure resulted in the revocation of the sentence. Since the Islamization program got under way, the number of attacks on women has increased. In every way the lot of women has worsened under the Islamic laws.

With the passage of the shariah bill in 1991, the position was further degraded, if that is possible. As one prominent feminist put it, ``The shariah bill is a means to control women and marginalize them instead of bringing in a just order. It is a law that facilitates aggression against women but ignores the corrupton in the country and it disregards violence against women.``

The Ulama (scholars) agree that the husband has the right to administer corporal punishment to his wife if she :

1) refuses to make herself beautiful for him.
2) refuses to meet his sexual demands
3) leaves the house without permission
4) neglects her religious duties. (see 1&2)

The prophet said : ``Hang up your whipe where your wife can see it``.

p.s. equating ``wadribu`` and ``daraba`` with intercourse is dishonest and an insult to the intelligence of women. Is the infallibility of Islam really that important when people`s lives are a living hell because of it ? If you guys think Islam can be reformed why are you telling us this ? Go and instruct the Taliban. Go and convince the Saudis and the Palestenians and the Indonesians and Philipino Muslims.

You are only delaying the inevitable and extending people`s misery. Islam and the Quran are not the dictators of what is right and wrong (considering they can be easily and have traditionally been translated or ``misunderstood`` to abuse and kill).

Are you really so eager to conform to our value system that you will twist the meanings of centuries of traditional Islam ? Are you really so spineless that you are willing to go to re interpretations just to avoid looking bad ?

Read the translation of this ayat at :

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/004.qmt.html#004.034

Does it even come close to your attempts at white washing Islam? You are only helping the clerics. You are confusing yourself and enamling the rotten core of this religion.

No offence to the people who follow it - you follow it because you were born into it and have been mindlessly following its rituals because you were told to do so. Muslims are good people it is Islam who makes them bad.

Further to # 192

....AND HINDUS

Please keep on hurling shi-t around and then running and hiding behind your (alleged) ``Sequeelarism``. But keep in mind that you tuck your dhotis in a very wrong place and you should know that when one grabs the ``bhaagtay hindu ki dhoti`` then what happens.

DEAR COWARDS

RE: Various Interactors

Disclaimer: This post applies only to those people who are defined as “Cowards” in the following text.

I am glad to see that at least half of the message has (finally) gotten across; i.e. most of the people now understand the difference between hurling insults and an interactive discussion intended to learn from each other. The other half, that, it is also wrong to keep quiet when someone hurls insults at others regardless of what group he belongs to, has, however, been lost in the air.

I would request you to go through all the responses so far (if you give a damn and want to listen any one other than yourself) you will see that the number of interacts that are related to the topic are shamefully low. “Rape” whether “marital” or “extramarital” is the most horrible and heinious crime that one human being commits on other. It is cowardly, shameful, and disrespectful to any decent human being to walk away from this issue or use this platform to insult other’s ideals. It is very easy to blame Solitude, Rsaxena, and me for all this digression (what a godawful word) but you must look into your hearts first. How many people found enough moral courage to stop us; to tell us that it is wrong to insult someone’s ideals to make a point; it is wrong to mis-quote, mis-represent, or lie to make a point. Instead you cowards kept quiet. How can we bring civility and decency in this forum if we turn a blind eye to hate-mongers, let alone learning. So listen Cowards, and listen good, it is not people like me who bring disgust in this forum, it is you who let us. That is what makes you bonafide COWARDS and you deserve it.

Okay, enough BAKWAAS, I know nobody gives a f-uck what I have written. You might also be thinking that I am asking you or Solitude or any other moron to refrain from insulting my religion- Oh NO- I am rather encouraging you to do so- I cannot stop you but I can only assure you of one thing that the reaction will be certain, swift, and unforgiving. I also guarantee you that it will be 100% painful- (you haven’t seen nothing yet).

I have nothing to say to Liberals because they are born bayghairat and baysharam-they take pride in insulting people’s ideals without giving a second thought that is it liberalism? How can one take off baysharmi and bayghairati which is now ingrained in your genes? So keep at it. BRAVO.

shankar, egalitarian brahmin, pankaj:

I don`t think we should banish Eastern values as useless and demeaning. As long as abusive relationships don`t occur in a marriage and extended family, the Eastern culture of family support is much healthier for our emotional well being.

Eastern elderly men and women have a great, respectful status in the family while their Western counterparts are ``put away`` in a nursing home.

I used to volunteer at a hospital with terminally ill people. The lack of family love and support shocked me. Sure there are exceptions, but the average American middle class grandmother/grandfather lives in a nursing home.

This is just one example that I have the time to provide right now. More later....

Too much ``individual liberation`` and too little are the problems faced by society. We have to find a middle ground to find a healthy balance in our lives.

Speaking of the International School of Choueifat in Lahore and views of Americans that have taught there, the following interview may be of interest:

http://southasia.uchicago.edu/aut99a.htm

All the best

Sheheryar

PS. Check out my new gallery at:

http://www.angelfire.com/il/sheher

PM

#85

Thanks for your input.

A few comments, if I may:

1) Since there are no hard & fast rules about ``sticking to the topic``, personally, if the author doesnt mind or prefers not to be a moderator, then I feel that posters have a choice of straying from the topic. I dont care if there are several conversations going on at the same time. Its the author`s perogative.

2) just for the record, I`m not & dont intend to play the role of a therapist here. Its no secret that I engage in occassional chutyagiri myself. If I think it hurts people`s feelings, then I apologise. Hey, I`m the first one to say that if everyone was expected to be extremely polite ,somber & behave themselves; this would be a real boring place. S *it it`ll feel like going back to school.

3)if bigots from both sides left Chowk, this place will feel like going to a place of worship--no thanks. So, just in case you think I`m advocating a group hug---HECK NO!!

Man, first of all, I dont trust you guys. Some of you are very liable to squeeze my balls if you get close enough :)

4) Psychoanalysis is increasingly getting passe. Primarily because it doesnt work! Ask Woody Allen if you dont believe me! He`s been in analysis for 30 yrs & he`s as neurotic & screwed up as ever. Nodoby can really ``analyse`` anybody in the cyberworld. If they could, there would be a million psychoanalysis.com companies. You can comment on someones verbal behavior patterns or neurotic vulnerabilities; but that too has a big margin of error.

So why did I ask you guys to take it easy? Simple. I know you dont intend to do it, but in your enthusiasm to catharse your anger, youre foaming at the mouth & little particles of saliva are shooting helter skelter. Some droplets are hitting our face. So catharse away ,my friend, but do use a handkerchief. If it makes you feel any better, I`ll use one too :)

I dont think the Indian law makes that distinction. I do know that India`s `Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act` is very liberal. I believe that other than South Africa & Finland, India is the only country to recognize socio-economic reasons as justifiable cause. Women have been known to come to India from surrounding countries like Nepal (where it is unambiguously illegal) just to exercise their choice.

One of the quirks of the Indian law is that it allows abortions to be performed by only very specific procedures & by only a select licensed professionals (in addition to government hospitals of course). Although this results in high success rates & hygienic conditions, it also means that low-tech `induced` abortions in a rural environment are deemed illegal.

About 5 million abortionas are practiced in India every year. Indian family planning program which involves mass media exposure and grass roots education, plus financial incentives for long term contracepticves such as IUD, plus its liberal abortion laws is probably the most studied program in the world.

Latif Chappu

Egalitarian Brahmin #165

A very poignant story. Straight out of heart. And this is the Truth and reality in millions of households in India. Till when the womenfolks in India will willingly continue this ``jauhar`` at the altars of family values! The octopus of society tightens its clutches on the unsuspecting womenfolks, in the name of morals/family values and saps the life out of them. Alas! even education does little to free them from the barbaric clutches of this octopus. Like yourself, it also infuriates me when people try to project their culture superior citing these ``moral`` grounds. And it annoys me when people take pleasure in denouncing anything western, especially their culture deluding themselves about the ``greatness`` of their own culture. At least their women have the luxuary of parting ways in such a situation, whereas our society condemns them to live in absolute misery throughout their lives making them a ``shaheed``.

I share your concern, my friend.

Sincerely

(re. #182 [I think])

Dear Shankar,

Your post may have lenghtened another tangential thread, but all the same was very relevant and `timely`-- Should stop the holier-than-thou desis in their tracks running down western morality and family values.

Working with many Indians (males and females), it is quite disgusting to witness the way the desi guys will show utmost `respect` for the opposite gender their own kind while sneering at the perceived `looseness` of the goris, who are innocent enough of cultural differnces to make the mistake of smiling and chatting with them, or hugging when greeting. I sometimes feel the locals here should be forewarned about desi perceptions about females based on their normal behaviour.

You were right on the money some months ago when you described the existence of most desis here as schizophrenic. Their self-righteousness knows few bounds, and now that they dominate the IT (or software anyway) industry, there is the perception among many that Americans are not smart enough to make it in this field ... Little do they understand that most Americans are too smart (or soulful) to get into the dreadfully mechanistic, mostly uncreative, labour of software coding--

Just last night, at home wathcing PBS, there was a programme on musical education in inner city schools. A remark by my roommate (a generally nice Indian bloke) sums up the attitude most have: ``What`s the use of all this music and Arts education if they can`t do well in Science and Maths?`` he quipped, not without some superority in tone.

Ooops... getting carried away..

Shankar, in another post, you wrote:

``However, I`m willing to bet that when His children are arguing & hating each other furiously that ``my way of worshipping God is better than your way``; He`s banging His head on the wall in frustration that we`ve forgotten why religion was ``invented`` by human beings in the first place.``

Sometimes your simpleness(?) surprises me. Yes, it would be wonderful if we could just get together, engage in one nice big group hug and get on all hunky dory from there on. But it ain`t gonna happen. AS a shrink I`d have thought you to be a little more aware of subconscious beliefs that put spokes in the wheel of harmony. Treating the symptoms will barely do away with the underlying causes, the fundamental differences in world view that -- like it or not -- exist between Pakistanis and Indians. Yes, yes, overtly, we all want peace and prosperity for our nations and our main concern is having food on our table for our kids, right? Wrong... Urstruly is at least honest in that he doesn`t cover up the distrust MANY Muslims have for Hindus and their religion. I`m sure there are many Hindus who reciprocate those feelings for Hindus -- not to mention Christians in the equation either.

You may be willing to give your blessings to your daughter if she chooses to marry a Muslim. I wonder how many others share your generosity. These are issues that WILL come up sooner or later. Sweeping them away with the Rodney King plea is just not on. As Peter Gabriel put it, we`ve gotta dig in the dirt, deal with our hatred, squabble, rail against and confront each other before we can embrace. You think there`ll ever be a lasting peace in Palestine based on some accord signed and handshake in Camp David? You think the Orangemen and the Catholics will really enjoy lasting peace because Mr. Clinton brokers a ceasfire? Ask the Serbs and Croats for answers.

We need to fight, challenge and get into heated arguements with each other... Two caveats: a) we also LISTEN to the others arguments, and b) retrict the battle to intellectual battle gorunds like these. Hopefully through such exchanges, a better understanding of not only the view, but the feelings, of the side should emerge. Pakistanis and Indians need cathartis, not band aids that covers up the depth of the wounds.

My friend fairdinkum calls for ``constructive criticism only`` when dealing with these matters, forgetting that the threshold of perceived contructiveness in an argument is completely subjective and variable. As an example, take your statement above: ``...we`ve forgotten why religion was ``invented`` by human beings in the first place.`` Although made in complete innocence, there are many who would take grevious exception to your suggestion that their religion was invented by humans. Your `neeyat` was clean enough, but how far will that take you

towards seeing eye to eye with the `other`?

Of course, no one will bring this up contradicton now, preferring to let it slide until it rears it`s ugly head when dealing with some particular issue... say divorce rights.

So, doc, what say we give up this simplistic lets-get-together-and-love-another treatment that even behavioural psyschs might balk at, and indulge in some good ol` fashioned psychoanalysis.

Freud never said treatment was gonna be pleasant.

rgds,

PM

Latif Chappu #182
Thanks for the information, but I think it applies to only in the first trimester. The two cases I came to know of personally, one was medically required(gender unknown) and in the other(the one that involved gender) the doctor didnot agree to perform it.

fairdinkum #174
``confrontational approach`` ``collective good``

I know what you mean but IMO this approach applies in extreme cases like Afghanistan where productive thinking people are herded like animals into their homes or situations in which women have to languish in jail for no fault of their own.

You bet a confrontational approach is what is required here. A society or system of thought can be as much corrupted by bad laws or bad principles as much as bad morals. It requires intellectual honesty to declare bad laws, bad laws. If even the excuse of upholding Islam is not valid, like so many of you assert, then bad laws are even more unambigously bad laws.

I think the basic problem here is that religion as a collective belief or cultural norm of an entire soceity is not in play in Pakistan, its religion as a political force applied by a few who donot bother to represent or be accountable to the sensibilities of majority which is in play. Get a vote!!

btw, your reference in #127 was interesting. Did you notice this contradiction, if it is indeed one?

http://www.seraj.org/zanan.htm
`` ...Of course, our jurists [fuqaha] disagree and believe that everything in Islamic law is permanent and eternal unless proven otherwise. But historical studies regarding the formation and formulation of Islam and fiqh paint a different picture.

That is to say, the Prophet basically endorsed the rules and commands current at the time in Arab society and they became the measures of justice in their own day. And there is no reason why we should consider the regulations current at that time in Arab society as the best possible regulations for all times... ``

mospel`s reply #101 to sigalph235 ``...Islam is not for all ages. Quran is for all ages. No hadith or any other word is time free. Its only the Book (Quran, and thus…pure Islam) which is for all ages and does not need any time adjustments....``

Sadhana

PM #180
May I hope that your sarcasm IS NOT directed at me?
btw, I wonder why chowk`ers donot realise that they cannot easily add to the lexicon of what has been said or done against Hindus, Hindu symbols and symbolism for many hundred years?? Christian missionaries were even eaten in Africa, what good did it do Africa, tell me that :-)?

Sadhana

Re: Sadna

Abortions are completely and unambiguously legal in India.

Tests like Amniocentesis and ultrasound (`sonogram` in India) are perfectly legal but the doctor is prohibited from revealing the gender.

Latif Chappu

Re: Krash Id, (And you too Yawaah)

Look at you sermonizing sanctimoniously at Urstruly. Run as you might from the fact that you are a narrow-minded little gnat, it`s inescapable. You may not be as uncouth as Ali1, not as crass as Urstruly, not as sophomoric as Ylh, but a hatemonger you are. Face it! At least Urstruly & ali1 dont run from their hatred!

People like you constantly put your feet in your mouth at Chowk and betray your consuming illwill towards all that`re not your tribe. When confronted with your gaffs however, you either evade the question or resort to your -Oh so Kindergarten- ``He hit me first`` excuse.

Like a dog running after his own tail you kick up a lot of dust and entertain others, all the while thinking you are involved in some purposeful search for the ultimate truth. What a joke!

Latif Chappu.

hamidm #151 I guess your posts strikes one for good old Charlie Brown. Reminds me of the brigadier sahib who used to joke that if granted a second life, he would plead with God to be sent back to earth either as a horse raised for the military or as a military officer`s wife - they have people scrambling to attend to their wishes and neither one of them has to do any real work.

egalitarian-brahman #168 and #169 Thanks for relating the story from your personal experience. It provides eloquent testimony to the point you make: that while the Indian society may have a low divorce rate compared to the US, this is because many marriages seem quiet on the surface, but are dead underneath. The seeming understanding between the marital partners in the marriage is in fact the ``silence of the grave``. The same holds for many unfortunate marriages in other societies too, of course, including Pakistan and even the US itself. Although I would agree with you that in places like the US where it is much easier for the abused person to walk away from the marriage without social stigmas or economic considerations, it would seem that there would be far fewer such ``silence of the grave`` marriages. The difference being then reflected in the divorce statistics. On balance, I think the situation in the US is much healthier than in India and Pakistan, although by no means ideal.

egalitarian_brahmin,

That was a very poignant narration. I`ve been in the US for 20 years & IMHO, the same crap (& worse) occurs in India. The only difference is that we Indians collectively use denial to justify that our culture has better values. What a load of hypocritical bull.

The worst kind of Indian Americans & (there are too many) is the one who has come here for one purpose only--to make money. They hate the American culture & isolate themselves (& their kids) from it. They will only socialise with Indians & put down America at every opportunity. They make sure their children only have Indian friends. They are the first one to squeal DISCRIMINATION! not realising how incredibly prejudiced they themselves are.

In the small town in Michigan I live in about 35% of the medical staff is Indian. Most of them are the biggest, prejudiced, clannish hypocritical SOBs I`ve ever met. Some of them are not beyond having affairs with nurses because Americans are ``easy to score``. After a couple of years my wife & I were so turned off by going to their parties that we have stopped going to their homes & inviting them to ours.

I`ve heard from the grapevine that they think my wife & I are snobs because we only socialise with Americans. They`ve even tried to ``punish`` me by never refering patients to me. It kills them that I really dont give a flying f_ck about it because I have a busy practice & have never ever needed their business. Some patients of theirs who come to me tell me that they vigorously want to refer them to someone else & only grudgingly give in when the patient insists :)

In general I`ve found an average American is more open minded, less prejudiced & less hypocritical than an average desi. If my daughter wants to marry an American, I have no problem with that--I dont care what his race & background is; as long as he is a good person & treats my daughter with respect.

Whether we like it or not, if we decide to immigrate to America, our children & our children`s children are going to become Americans. If they cant accept that, they better move their brood & their asses back to India.

Let me tell you a poignant true story. One of the biggest assholes among them is a cardiologist who has been screwing every nurse whose pants he can get inside. He rammed the Indian culture down his daughter`s throat. He used to proudly boast how he sends his daughter to the most exclusive private school in Detroit & sends her to Sanskrit classes, Indian dance classes & Veda instructions. He bought a house near the school (as he lives & practises about 100 miles from Detroit), made his ultraconservative parents live there with the daughter (so she wont go astray).

About 3 yrs ago, unbenownst to him, his daughter made an appointment with me. She cried in my office that her father was going to send her to India to marry a boy that they chose for her. She said shes in love with an African American boy who comes from a good family & wants to marry him. However, she was too scared to tell her parents because they would excommunicate her & shes totally financially dependant on them. All I could do was allow her to vent her feelings in an empathetic environment. Contrary to popular belief, psychiatrists dont give specific advise (ie what she should do or not do). Its unethical. I helped her sort out her own feelings & empathise with her quandry but only she has to perogative to make a choice in this ``damned if you do--damned if you dont situation `` It was a one time visit.

To make a long story short, I heard that somehow, her parents convinced her to marry this Indian boy under duress. After 3 months of marriage (the boy was still in India waiting for his visa) she sent divorce papers to him & told him she was running away from home to marry the man she loved.

I`m not qualified to say whether she was right or wrong. I know one thing though--I`ll NEVER put my own daughter through that.

sadna #117

``With so much general consensus and understanding (with replies on chowk as example) about the imperatives of Islam being against these evils, my question is, what exactly is holding up reform?``

Sadhanaji, would you please desist from asking these irrelevant questions (like the one in #136 too) on this board.

Can you not see we have more relevant issues to discuss such the relative desireable weightage of IQ and EQ in intelligent/unintelligent societies; not to mention phallic symbolism in Hinduism.

How on earth are YOUR questions related to finding a solution to the senseless Pakistani laws re. rape.!?!

rgds,

PM

scout #163:

``I don`t believe that the Quran has all the right answers all the time.``

I wasn`t suggesting YOU did. The statement of mine from #138 that you quoted related to those apologists who seem to bent on making `sense` of any and every thing in the Book - to the extent of reaching ridiculous conclusions that the four-witness-requirement was merely to protect against `public indency`... paying no heed to the ``guard what Allah has quarded`` dictums.

Don`t want ot sound like a broken record now...

rgds,

Re: eg_brahmin

Would you chill with your 10,000 word posts? It`s annoying to scroll up and down to and have to switch boards to see more posts. Also, if you must write these long posts, for god sakes engage someone other than the village idiot with bad English.

KRashid, Tahmed, scout,

I appreciate the stand you folks took with Urstruly.

The concept of religion is a touchy issue (unfortunately). Any religious criticism can cause pain & arouse passion--especially, if someone from a different religion criticises it. If the critic shows complete ignorance of the religion he/she is criticising, it sounds humorous (to me atleast).

Just like any society ,country or culture has skeletons in their closets that are shameful, I feel every religion has its share of skeletons. I certainly dont have God`s wisdom. However, I`m willing to bet that when His children are arguing & hating each other furiously that ``my way of worshipping God is better than your way``; He`s banging His head on the wall in frustration that we`ve forgotten why religion was ``invented`` by human beings in the first place.

I`m beginning to appreciate hamidm`s iconoclastic posts. As far as I`m concerned, its just a way of communicating with God. I`ll take what I want from my religion & reject whatever I dont like about it. If some hindu priest dares to object, I`ll give him a fatwa right in the nuts. We`re taking religion far too seriously. I had no problem whatsoever that my daughter wanted to enroll in Sunday school when her best friend joined it.

I have a feeling that when Urstruly gets hurt when Islam is bashed, he bashes the Hindu religion to demonstrate what the pain feels like. Unfortunately, far from feeling offended, I laughed out loud at his posts. I enjoy fighting with him--he`s an OK guy.

sadna #172

``IMO, there are many reasons to have faith that facing these questions honestly leads to cleansing and regeneration of any system of thought or belief, not its demise.``

Provided that discussion of such issues and the relevant questions are posed with a positive and constructive approach that is conducive to dialogue and leads to an environment in which regeneration of thought or belief is possible. Also, due care and intellecutual honesty demands that all other factors such as cultural norms and certain traditions which a society may force upon individuals as necessary for collective/common good (keep the family together at all costs, for example) are subjected to rigerous study and review without necessarily apportioning blame or adopting a confrontional approach towards a certain group, school of thought or belief.

egalitarian_brahmin #169

Your impassioned posts make a lot of sense in some ways.

I particularly like ``it is better to act pragmatically than give in to the calls of a culture.``
Let me embellish that : its better to act pragmatically than to give in mindlessly to the calls of a culture or religion.

Meaning, an abusive husband is an abusive husband whatever the underlying culture or religion. You will find abusive husbands/fathers in every culture, even in societies which offer every facility for women to freely walk away or resort to plastic surgery.

You link Krishna, Hinduism and bathing in the Ganges with it, but I have to tell you, if these are the excuses used by some, the rest of the world does very well in finding other excuses.

My point of view is what is the point in helping perpetuate any ideology, religious or political or social, whether revealed by a Godlike figure or by the most powerful ecenomic engine of the world, if human beings cannot survive its application in fit condition? Does it not defeat the original purpose of the ideology?

Should we consider insults to religious/traditional/modern principles more heinous than insults to the humanity of human beings? IMO, there are many reasons to have faith that facing these questions honestly leads to cleansing and regeneration of any system of thought or belief, not its demise.

Sadhana

dost-mittar #150
`` I thought abortion was legal in India. Are you by any chance confusing with the law banning of tests to determine the sex of the foetus, to prevent people from gender-selection of their babies?``

I meant laws to discourage female foeticide. You are right, there is a law banning tests to determine the sex of the foetus. And I think(I am not sure) abortions are legal only to save the life of the mother, such as if the foetus is found to be abnormal. But in practice, I think its a real mess out there, `public` outrage and the interest of politicians like Jayalalitha nothwithstanding. Its like pervasive corruption with doctors determined to make money or parents determined to have sons. I`ve seen signs painted on walls over many parts of N. India advertising `garbhpaath`. Sometime last year or the year before the Indian Medical Council(maybe just the Delhi chapter) passed a resolution asking its members to refrain from performing these abortions.

I ran into some family-planning workers once who worked in rural areas, who explained how they have identified a natural way which offers a higher chance child would be male. They hoped it would prevent parents from having too many children while waiting for a son and also saving the health and possibly the life of the mother.

My point was, even though its a Hindu concept that only a son`s offer of obsequies can ensure a man`s place among his ancestors after death, these heinous practices are being opposed without accusations of shortchanging Hindusim and passing of laws provides a much-needed baseline.

Sadhana

sigalph235,

The following article may enhance your understanding of the world of fundamentalism.

The World of Fundamentalism

by Robert Wuthnow

Excepts:

``a major project sponsored by the American Academy of Arts and Sciences many of the best minds in religious studies from colleges and universities all over the world have been hard at work trying to answer this question. Directed by Martin E. Marty and R. Scott Appleby, funded lavishly by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the project is employing a cast of hundreds, holding scores of conferences and symposia, and is expected to produce at least six lengthy volumes of essays over the next several years. The initial volume has already provided many valuable insights into the world of fundamentalism. Some of these insights will be familiar to knowledgeable readers, but because the movement is so misunderstood it is important to set the record straight.``

``Contrary to the vague, misleading ways in which the term is often deployed in popular journalism, fundamentalism, the present volume reminds us, is a specific theological movement. It can be understood only in relation to particular times, places, events and figures. Christian fundamentalism should not be confused with evangelicalism, the charismatic movement or conservative Christianity in general, although it has had connections with all these. Nor should it be considered a personality style, a mind-set, a form of religious militancy, a world view or even a particular orientation toward the truth. Fundamentalism has always been shaped by its implicit dialogue with the world surrounding it.``


Full text of the article at:

http://www.religion-online.org/cgi-bin/relsearchd.dll?action=showitem&id=235

A powerful poem ........one can almost feel the piercing pain.

Dear Upman, you said it man.

``so before you participate in the nouveau riche-esque national pastime of Nehru-bashing, pause, think, and accord dignity to a person who definitely deserved it..`` (upman)

Nehru made India what it is today -- a civilized, democratic, compassionate, stable, secular country -- respected world over.

So much so -- that the yesterday`s saffaronized assassins of Gandhi -- could not come to power today -- without undergoing a process of civilizing, cleansing and scrubbing – to remove quite a few stains from their clothes of bloody bigotry -- by the Nehru instituted -- political mainstream of Indian secularism.



Nehru gave India a sense of inclusive unity -- and a confident Indianess -- that did not require the criminal crutches of a hateful Hindutva -- whereby a MAJORITY of 85% is made to feel like an insecure MINORITY --threatened by a miniscule number of 12% Muslims and 3% Christians.

So much so that they would destroy a historical monument -- a religious symbol of 150 million Muslims -- just like those illiterate Talibani criminals of Bamiyan.

In short -- Nehru saved India from becoming a carbon copy of -- its fundamentalist infested --sectarian killing -- army governed -- fractured neighbor, Pakistan.

This is the corrected version of my previous post(see below). Ignore my post below and read this post only.

scout #11 ``Indian women look anemic and wasted`` And Zahra writes something about being able to tell Indian men from Paki men. And Farangi kind of nods his head.

Oh please. This is Chowk, ladies (and Farangi)!! We discuss issues here... But since the discussion is already at the playpen level, let me put on my diaper jump right in...

So Scoutie, Indian women look wasted. Maybe Aisharwya Rai is wasted. Some waist!! I mean waste. We need such waisted women in Pakistan my dear.

And Zahra can tell a Paki from an Indian from 20 paces...I bet she is so good she can do it with her eyes closed - if the stench is so bad she has to close her nose with the right hand, then it is a Paki (right hand, muslim, get it??); if the stench is so bad she uses the left hand to close nose, it is an Indian.

OK. Playpen time over. All babies on this board to now get their milk bottles, close there eyes, and try to sleep.

Last try!

You can also reach them at:

inrfvvpe@athena.louisville.edu

Thanks

Ras

Mushtaq and for those that need that e-mail address (I hope that this one is correct)
please contact:

Rights of Female Victims of Violence in Pakistan List INRFVVP@LISTSERV.LOUISVILLE.EDU


INRFVVP@LISTSERV.LOUISVILLE.EDU


Ras

Egalitarian Brahmin# 148

There is a vast difference between two cultures, if you are aware (As I don`t know you are born American or migrated as adult). The State in America presumably thinks that it can take care of the the society, and its injustices and there is very weak family system and support. While in our countries strong family system does not like interference by State.

Don`t think that I am condoning abuse in our culture. But sometimes, it becomes necessary to control children. Moreover even Americans are sane enough to consider 18 years as the age limit where a person can make a rational decision regarding life matters.

tahmed123,

As one who recently re-learnt the value of reading without preconceived notions and biases, I strongly recommend the exercise to you.

Hoping your insecurities are not going to keep you from doing so...

rgds,

PM #138, ``a belief that the Quran has all the right answers for all times, does a number on people’s minds, and often enough causes them to engage in grotesque exhibitons of intellectual contortionism.``

I don`t believe that the Quran has all the right answers all the time.

Tell me what I said to give you that impression.

Actually, don`t tell me. I hate having the same useless arguments time and time again on Chowk.

I didn`t mean to single you out, there ARE interactors who use disrespectful language, and make worse assumptions/negativities about Islam than u do.

Prem #143,

Well said. Especially the last line.

re

Urstruly #134,

Tsk tsk, kya ho gaya hai tumhe? You`re falling into the same fundamental ``hate`` category that Solitude is king of.

Don`t stoop that low.

Latif Champu #153

I can bet you that chilly(i) sensation is extreme. And this post just shows that it is getting worse with time.

If you want treatment for it use some Lidocaine cream.

Inshallah, your thoughts which are near to crying will come in a smiling way.

Don`t Cry Baby. Dheeraj.

Let me know the trick, how you keep your hands steady on computer key board while jumping up and down.

HamidM #151

Are rest of the males on this forum on the same boat or there is still a ``Mard`` left.

That is why it is said that if bowing (Sajda) was allowed besides God it would be for husband.:-)

Sac:

``Intelligence lies in having the ability to recongnize where having a law would solve the problem and where it won`t. If you want an analogy consider the differnce between having a high IQ and a high EQ. Societies with large IQs tend to solve everything with laws and societies with high EQs believe in the inefficacy of legal measures and turn to religion or some other idealogy for solace. Ideally you want a balance.``

I thought about my question and somehow I would lean towards ``wisdom`` than ``pure intelligence.``

Being wise will make a judge use his intelligence when he needs to and appear stupid when he wants to. It`s not that he lost his intelligence for that time period[posing to be stupid], but realized when he needed to get more information and didn`t have enough substance to formulate his theories about a case. I just took an example of a judge - jury is mostly full of clowns [Watch the movie - ``12 Angry Men`` starring Henry Fonda - Classic!!!]Also this movie will give you a clear picture about the intelligence factor and the logos and pathos concepts. [I agree with your thoughts on the balance]

Secondly, your example on IQ vs EQ reminds me of a series of seminars I had to attend under an Emerging Leaders` Program. One session was on Pure Negotiatons. It was a very intense and disturbing 14 hour session where one had to go through a rigorous case study and the instructor would play the devil`s advocate. He would highly disapprove of the emphasis on IQ only - a part and parcel of a consultant`s life - and tried to inject the role of EQ back to the real life that we forget many times in our business cases. This was the best part of the seminar - I consciously fell in love with the concepts of Logos, Pathos and Ethos. I feel you`ve put two aspects in one category in your above thought. Pathos and Ethos are different from each other and have very defined characteristics.

Continued..[as the battery is about to die]

Ras Siddiqui:
[Zahra Ji, you are welcome to not get in touch with inrfvvp@inrfvvp.org]

I agree this is INDEED a free country that`s why I also expressed my views on the comments than the writer!

By the way, I may end up initiating the group to help the needy[mentioned in my post]myself and would expect you to be a volunteer for the Kara-e-Khair.

Thanks in advance!