The Meaning of Pakistan

Sadna reply #97

You say:``Another point being that apart from the obvious pitfalls I listed, making judgements in public affairs about who is ``better or worse`` is contrary to the much-touted principles of `equality and justice`. I called it untouchability earlier, I can also call it a virtual caste system``

Sadna,

Maybe you did not read my post carefully, let me reiterate,I personally believe that Islam in theory is a much better defined religion and has better attributes than Hinduism. I said nothing about certain people being better or worse than certain other people. Concepts of equality and justice apply to humans, not to methodologies or religions which are judged by humans.

If you are trying to find parallels between the Hindu caste system and prejudices around the world in an effort to lessen criticism of the caste system or to make it seem more acceptable, please realize that in a way you are defending this wicked practice.

Ref ali1 #: 107

[RE # 93 Haramiu

[Rama, Sita and Hanuman are legends. They may or may not have existed.]

So what is this fuss about the Ram Janambhoomi? Why demolish a minority place of worship?]

Muhammed was for real. Is Allah for real? Allah is as real to you as Ram is to Hindus; but you can`t accept that.

[All for the sake of your mumbo jumbo religion and a fictitous god per your own admission?]

Have you seen Allah? Has anybody seen Allah? Has he descended from the heavens and provided food and water to the starving Afghans now that his hated idols have been demolished?

What? Afghanistan is still dry as a bone? Does that mean Allah is a fraud? That Muhammed is also a fraud?

[I think you Hindoo thugs are trying to repeat history. Indooland is the only place where budhism was wiped out]

Through peaceful reconversion to Hinduism. People simply abandoned Buddhism after the few Buddhist kings like Harshavardhan and Asoka died off. There was no major support among the masses for Buddhism.

The same thing is true for Jainism also. Jainism came to the South, stayed for some years, converted a few kings, and found royal patronage. After a couple of generations, people and the kings went back to worshipping Shiva. There was no organized mass killings as Islamist thugs have historically done.

[and vajpayee and other facist pigs are trying to do the same with christians and muslims now.]

We wouldn`t know what caste to give you. So you can safely remain Islamic pigs.

[Rest of your incoherent babble: you can feed your RSS followers with this ``ideological`` crap, other people know better.]

The rape of Indonesian Chinese is well documented as is the rape, pillage and murder of East Timorese. As is the cultural destruction of Afghanistan. You can try telling your fairy tales to your children but the entire world knows what you pigs are doing.

[I hope you didn`t forget to eat your cow-dung biscuits, did you?]

I am saving them for you. Oops, I forgot; you prefer yours made of camel-dung.

Two types of fools on chowk are extremely annoying. One, some Indians who are obsessed with reunification and lost in the dreams of a ``greater India``. They are far removed from the intricate complexities of the present situation, and fail to appreciate the fact that partition, at least in this case was an irreversible process and will remain so in the forseeable future. Two some diffident Pakistanis who constantly worry about why Pakistan was formed, what is its identity, that is how are they different from their neighbours etc. Both types of people should realise the fact that Pakistan is a sovereign state like any other country and nobody has the right to question its existence. The geographical boundaries between the countries was never the same in past and may not remain the same in future. But that doesn`t take away the right to nations to exist in present.

Sadna:

In response to:

``Re Islam vs Hinduism and which you think has `better attributes`, what you seem to be saying is Aisha and Pakistani Muslims` hatred of Hindusim is rational and not irrational. Hence, a hatred for Hinduism and its practitioners is a inseparable (and morally justifiable or even a moral prerequisite) part of the Pakistani identity adn not evil idolatory in disguise. If that is what you are saying, then how is harimau mistaken in HIS rantings(from the opposite point of view)?``

No I`m not saying that. I`m saying that one can hate a certain practice and consider it an abomination e.g. the caste system, or killing of blasphemers, but it would be an error to extend that hatred to an entire religion or to an entire group of people. I don`t know what Aisha believes or hates and I (or you for that matter) surely do not know what the `Pakistani Muslims` believe or hate. Its a basic flaw in thinking when one starts to generalize or aggregate opinions of entire people based on the statements of a few. The flaw is that it leads to incorrect and unusable conclusions, especially in the diverse world we live in.

The better or worse opinion regarding Islam and Hinduism is my personal preference, if you think it leads to massacares and trouble, what do you suggest I do, start believing all religions are equal ? Before you answer this, please read the question again. I`m talking about personal preferences, not about civil laws that pertain to freedom of religion. I do not have to believe other people`s belief`s or even respect them but I also do not have the right to take away their freedom to practice them. Also, these beliefs are subject to laws created by humans that supercede them. Some of these laws that nations and countries create are to allow their diverse (in every sense of the word) populations to co-exist peacefully, so that any one`s group particular belief does not infringe on others.

Coming back to our earlier, more specific discussion, I said that certain Islamic groups -not everyone, may be painting all of Hinduism in a negative light using the negative attributes of Hinduism, for other purposes i.e. getting more converts.

On a different note, why is the Indian government against conversions ? Why do the Hindu hardline groups threaten and attack missionaries if they suspect them of converting ? Are you personally against letting Indians have the freedom to convert to any religion ?

thanx for your response.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Karakoram #115
Sigh. I said ``better or worse`` in PUBLIC AFFAIRS, not personal opinions. I am not willing to share my personal opinion about my religion vs yours and your own personal relative assessment is totally irrelevant to me. I donot feel the need to take you or anyone else into confidence on this matter.

So I always find it puzzling that many Pakistani Muslims, Aisha and now yourself as most recent examples keep saying ``Islam is the religion of equality and justice, it is the best, hence we abhor/dislike Hindus and Hinduism``. What sort of equality is demonstrated in saying that?

Personal opinions and beliefs are one thing, but in assertions like the above, you are trying to introduce ``better and worse`` hierarchy in interactions between yourself and other people. In this article too this concept of Islam is best( with passing references to Hinduism to say what it is better than ) is sought to be projected over an entire country`s population. There is nothing new is this concept for Pakistan, the religious polarisation or fragmentation of polity and the perils of using the religious terminology for simple things like criminal law are there for all to see.

I am only pointing out this contradiction between equality on one hand and carrying `better` chip-on-the-shoulder in public. I doubt the world cares how superior you happen to think Islam is, they are interested to see how you treat `others`. Muslim countries treat `others` very badly, I was pointing out its a virtual casteism, and I am saying donot drag in Hindusim and the caste system to justify it.

`` I don`t know what Aisha believes or hates and I (or you for that matter) surely do not know what the `Pakistani Muslims` believe or hate. Its a basic flaw in thinking when one starts to generalize or aggregate opinions of entire people based on the statements of a few. The flaw is that it leads to incorrect and unusable conclusions, especially in the diverse world we live in.``

Are you saying Aisha doesnot mean what she says?
#39 is just a small example
``.. -The ultimate goals of all bearable civilizations are justice and equality. I don’t think ideals can get any better. My Islam has those concepts embedded in it, but Muslims are a mirror of the opposite… Hindu influence I guess....``

Hindu influence over Muslim countries from ``Horn of Africa to the Philippines``? You call this a usable conclusion, perhaps or merely a comforting one?

And are you saying that the Islamist parties donot mean what they say when they want to convert Indians?

Re conversions: I donot know what are the laws. I suspect foreign proselytizers of any shade having visions of `harvests` in India are on a painful collision course with the politically-aware Indian public and Indian government. I`d advise such hopefuls not to count on such surrender of Indian sovereignity by `other means`. I also suspect the same foreign hopefuls may just find that noone recognises they have any `entitlement` in this respect, however great they think their religion is.

btw, I have been around chowk 1+ years and have been reading the Pakistani press and I recognise ingenousness when I see it.

Sadhana

Ref ali1 #: 85

[And that her vaginal and rectal orifices were enjoined as a result of this one night stand?]

Perhaps if Ayesha had been examined by a medical doctor after her encounter with Muhammed, he would have reported a similar condition. No wonder you Islamic pigs revel in this kind of debauchery wherever you go.

Here`s what the Financial Times has to say: @

http://surveys.ft.com/pakistan2001/

Mohajir Urf Sadhna #112

One thing to clarify.

Qazi Hussain was a succesful businessman. He left business because he could not afford to pay the bribes involved in businesses practices due to religious reasons.

Second there is no mention of the person whose interview is taken, nor is the dateline and article.(although the contents appear authentic)

If you continue to do the sloppy job as you are doing these days on this forum. Making Muslims more Muslims and even producing a soft corner in some Indians regarding Pakistanis, you will soon be fired.

So keep your job in good shape and continue to spew hatred for which you are paid.

I`ve been following this circus for a while. Sure Pakistan is a reality--economically, socially and politically. So why do you waste your damn time defining the meaning of your country?

The reality is that there can be no one meaning. Different people are going to have different takes. So bloody what?

Karakoram

You say,``On a different note, why is the Indian government against conversions ? Why do the Hindu hardline groups threaten and attack missionaries if they suspect them of converting ? Are you personally against letting Indians have the freedom to convert to any religion ?

``

According to the Indian Constitution, ``Every Indian citizen has the right to practice,profess, and propagate his own religion.....``. In a very famous case in 1980s, the Supreme Court of India ruled that the word ``propagate`` as written in Indian Constitution does not extend to forced conversion. In other words, if a person changes his religion on account of his/her own ``free will`` and in absence of any external inducements, allurements,fear, or extortions it is legal. However if any person/organization seeks to convert people of other faiths by offering any monetary allurements or any other type of external inducement/fear, it is illegal.

PS One of the persons I know had been a victim to such an attempt of proselytization by a religious group. After befriending him, people of the aforementioned group tried to entice him into marrying a girl of their religion offering him substantial monetary benefits from the group. Of Course he totally refused and snapped off contact with the above group of religious peeple. But this is one such blatant attempt of conversion in Indian society which is by and large poor and sometimes vulnerable to such allurements. Such subversive attempts have to be opposed by everybody.

Karakoram #115 #118

You have touched on a couple of things that are close to my heart. That is becaue I was born a Dalit, and today consider myself to be a proud casteless Hindu - much as Arya Samajis think of themselves.

In my experience, non-Hindus engage in two kinds of rhetorics about caste. Both of these require different responses from today`s enlightened Hindus.

One focuses on the evil that the caste system really is - how the system debases human beings, how it is a collective shame for Hindus. Most hindus should (and in my opinion do) agree with this view. I wish people`s behavior changed as quickly as their theoretical acceptance of the idea of equality. But there is clear movement. I have suffered on account of my caste much less than did my father.

The other rhetoric is not primarily about Hinduism but about some other religion, in which people raise the issue of caste to `prove` that their other religion is `better.` This, as you will agree, is clearly blindness borne of prejudice. Hindus are perfectly within their rights to point out to such gentlemen the horrors that exist within other non-Hindu systems. That does not constitute a defense of the indefensible caste system, but a legitimate defense of Hinduism - a system many believe to be the best in the world - from dishonest attacks.

With regards to conversion, we face many tricky issues. What are the universal norms with regard to conversions and the treatment of missionaries? As you know, many countries simply do not allow conversion from the majority faith. Some others that do allow members of the majority faith are far more hostile to such apostates than India is. Missionaries too do not find univeral welcome. Why? There are all kinds of cultural reasons related to people`s deeply held beliefs. You can criticize India by saying that it does not meet the ideal of letting people painlessly choose their religion. However, if you want to somehow imply (even in your own mind) that you are `better,` then you have do some soul searching - does your country or community deal with the issue of apostasy more liberally?

ylh #109

You seem to be an animal right person.

Mohajir#112

Thanx for putting up the interview. Probably the views of Quazi explain why many of the Hindus are very apprehensive about the intent of Muslims. Infact VHP did use several such recordings of the interviews to prove their point aboout Muslims and garner support for their movement. I understand that these are not the views of the majority of Muslims but there is definitely a committed minority holding such views. And may be a growing minority among Hindus too who have extreme views about Muslims.

re. the article and:

``fundamentalists in my opinion are those who take Islam to be a religion, and all other’s (Muslims) are those who take Islam to be a Deen (way of life).``

and ylh on distinction between nation and State and, in #91:

``Islam as a social philosophy and ethic instead of a religion, I think that is the crux of the argument. ``

And what, pray tell, is the difference between a `way of life` and a religion based on a belief -- a necessary belief -- in having the incontorvertable answers to life`s questions.

You can wax on all you like about Islam will be a (mere) cultural identifier, a Way of Life for Muslims to practice (out of free will? by enforcement?) and how religious minorities such as myself (pointing this out take the `statistic` out of them) will not be enjoined to follow this way (--but will Muslims?). Well, theorize all you want, Ms. Sarwari ad Mr. Hamdani, but just do me one favour... tell me how you way-of-life this: Minorities 9and women) by quranic injunction, no less, are 1/2 citizens in the eyes of the law. Or will you have me believe that there is no such thing as Islamic law, a la Tahmed? Puh-leeez! wake up and smell...

So, once again, will slavery (benign, of course) be permitted in the Islam-as-way-of-life-but-not-as-polity Minorites have full citizenship rights, even if it goes against the very basis of Islam law (the Quran and hadith) What is the essential or practical difference between the Pakistan we have now and the one in which Islam will merely be a `Way of Life``. If there are some changes to be brought about, who will decide what they are to be and who is to enforce them.... wait a minute... this all sounds very familiar already, does it not?

So, tell me Yasser, in the distinction between Nation and State, how is Islam to be `implemented` (can`t think of a better word) in the former (assuming you are against its factoring in the latter)?

``Pakistan is increasingly becoming symbolic, its most important asset, the

people, are failing to understand that Faith simply means going by universal laws that are essentially similar for everyone and that, it is just a matter of studying patterns.``

Now tell me, is the half-citizen status of Religious Minorites a ``univeral law`` or an aberration? Once again, will it figure in your `Islam-as-way-of-life` Pakistan or not?

``Pakistan wasn’t created to be a theocratic state to be ruled by priests with a divine mission``, but instead a system of governance that was to be essentially secular and democratic, just like the elements of an Islamic state should incorporate within it, if we choose to see the true Islam in the perspective of Deen and not Madhab.``

Here`s my email addy, Sarwari...shortstopman@hotmail.com. Please feel free to tell me how the perspective of Islam as Deen and not Mazhab affects the implementation of some of the Islamic principles I have pointed out. How do you justify NOT using a perfected guideline for life as the basis of polity in either a Muslim state or Nation. Indeed, given what it means to be Muslim (five pillars et al) is there any disticntion at all between a Muslim Nation and a Muslim State, except if the former simply describes the rough composition of the country`s populace (in which case, Pakistan has ALWAYS been VERY Muslim anyway) Yasser, you`re welcome to throw in your ideas too.

also from teh article: ``I am hopefull that since the new revolutionaries don’t have to waste time starting from a void, by abandoning all preconceived notions thereafter creating a pressure for that void to be filled, and then filling it with one source of light and love (God), one can simply start with the Quran. ``

So, how will the new revolutionaries be different from the old ones? You think you (or your generation) are the first twenty year old/s Pakistani Muslim/s to have been imbued with a spirit of `true jihad`?! Perhaps SmaeerJB and Krashid can help temper your no doubt valuable enthusism with a dose of reality.

Sawari #39:

``The ultimate goals of all bearable civilizations are justice and equality. I don’t think ideals can get any better. My Islam has those concepts embedded in it, but Muslims are a mirror of the opposite Hindu influence I guess. ``

Since when did there start to be a ``my`` islam and ``their`` Islam? Isn`t it all laid out in black and white? And -- much as the general tenor of Islam is egalitarian in nature -- does the Quran not clearly regulate non-Muslim believers (to say nothing of kafirs) to second-class status?

I don`t believe you are acting with anything but the best of intentions, and perhaps even some sublime vision...but these blinding visions often ed up doing just that -- blind!

rgds, and hoping you will throw some light on my queries. I want the best for Pakistan just as you do (if u can believe that, coming from a non-Muslim :) )

PM

re. Ylh #91

``The utter lack of understanding that you people have shown for this article has made me realize that in the world where ``IT`` people from the silicon valley rule, true intellecutualism is under grave threat. I hold the silicon valleyites in greatest contempt for their lack of tolerance and understanding. No not everything works according to the binary code, not everything is C++... and sure as hell not Java. ``

Do you think I might have any chance appreciating the wisdom of this article? I mean, as a VB coder. Not quite as object-oriented as C++ or Java... still a lot of room for hairy scary spaghetti-like coding (until that damn Gates and Balmer roll out their dot.net version anyway:))