Brahmin and Mullah

Zafar Al-Talib:

It took me a few minutes to understand your one liner. I agree as well as disagree. Why? Some other time.

Take Care.

MaheshG #434

There is nothing to clarify. Let me quote Zafar Al-Talib

#400
`` As to the Muslims are more equal than non-Muslims thing, please see my response #33. I think it is clear, as far as it goes. This is, of course, open to Ijtihad, however. Kaun karne thaiyar hai?``

#33
`` If we see heirarchy as a process of assigning relative values to individuals, Islam codifies heirarchies as well. For example ``Muslims are better than People of the Book who are in turn better than Kaafirs``. Or (I know fundies will argue with this but anyway) ``Men carry greater legal weight than Women`` (as shown in the relative importance of male and female witnesses).

Interestingly, [while ]Islam is very specific about who is and is not a muslim, and then ranks non-Muslims in order of closeness to God`s word (people of the book, the rest), etc ``

Doesnot this make it clear that Islam codifies a heirarchy with Muslims ABOVE nonMuslims? Namely according to Islamic principles, Muslims and nonMuslims are not equal. Am I a bigot for believing him and not tahmed?

I will ask you too, why is it bigotted and anti-Muslim to ask in which Muslim society are Muslims considered equal to nonMuslims?

Zafar, I`m sorry to drag your fair name into this meaningless tussle. Why people cannot read the posts(and articles) before interacting is beyond me.

friend #425 ``Yaar, guru ho tum!``

Yaar, guru you can have my turn. I think I have explained enough to you.

Zafar Al-Talib #424 ``I find this disagreement between you (sadna) and tahmed321 quite confusing``

Please see my post #421 where I write ``Hope this makes you understand why I resent Sadna`s refusal to accept any version of Islam other than the worst kind.`` The other issue I have is on her concept of ``collective guilt`` as she explained to me in an earlier board and which makes no sense to me. Do I start holding all Indians responsible for the burning to death of the two Australian boys a couple of years ago? Or for the attacks on muslims in Mumbai under Thakeray? Surely there is as much injustice in India as there is in Pakistan. Just the fact that one is a democracy and the other does not change the fact that there are criminals in every society. Does one tar the entire society with the same brush as one applies to the criminals.

PM: I think Zafar Al-Talib has provided a better response to your post than I could have, and I agree with it.

Sadna, can you clarify to Tahmed that you don`t think the only Islam is the worst kind. Somehow, he`s got into his head that the only Islam that you believe exists is the one that is prevalent among Pakistani mullahs.

friend
I was lost in wonder myself.

Zafar Al-Talib #429 #419

You say it is hard to fight fundamentalists and their modus operandi of violence hence ordinary citizens cannot be heard unless there are regular elections. I agree fully.

But what if ordinary citizens themselves donot want elections? What if the intellectual and educated themselves donot want elections? How are fundamentalists to be dealt with then? Thats the sort of scenario where young people who may have never seen an election in their lifetimes, propagate theories about Hindus and Indians as the reason for all evils.

And hence I am not confused by disagreements between myself and many other chowkwallahs, I think I have very fundamental differences with them, which has nothing to do with mutually impolite behaviour.


I wrote last week to a Dawn columnist that I feel fortunate that I didnot grow up learning values from intellectuals like himself and that I was proud of the equality that we are striving for in every public sphere in India, to erase inequities of class, caste and religion.

That pretty much sums up my contempt for most(though not all) Pakistani `intellectuals`.

Inspite of every physical threat, one is still free to think and have opinions. One is free to assemble and organize with others of similar mind. One is free to see what is happening in the rest of the world and draw parallels to understand what is happening at home. One`s soul is free, one`s belief in God is free, one doesnot owe the neighbourhood mullah anything, however many goons or guns he has.

I was reading an article by an Algerian woman who mentioned how in Algeria over the years 1000s of intellectuals have been murdered by Islamists and a secular polity with a well defined `Algerian` identity which existed in the 50s-60s has dissolved and its now how Islamic or unIslamic one is, how Islamic or unIslamic is society, with the Algerian minorities being considered inferior on basis of Islam. It seems to be a similar scenario in Egypt?

Have scores of intellectuals been murdered in Pakistan? I donot know the answer to that question.

But the day I see any group of this reported majority of `moderates` (who seem to be much wealthier than the average salary-earning middle class Indian)get organized and leave their drawing rooms and take a public stand on ANYTHING for the whole world and fundamentalists to see and not leave it to solitary fighters like Asma Jahangir, is the day I will begin to have respect for them.

Till then I will consider articles like this one to be part of the `reactionary` tendency, whose secular tendency extends to only anti-Hinduism or ant-Indianism, where the external threat is made an excuse for internal apathy.

As an Indian, I donot plan to be fall guy in a 1000 years of blame which I think is all that is in store for India and Indians from Pakistan:).

On that note, I can bet many people of the moderate mentality would not have read the article in the Friday Times about the Hisbah ordinance either, much less pondered what they can, if anything do about it, (if they oppose it).

I wonder what would happen in India if such a measure was contemplated or 100 thousand women were prevented from voting by a religious party.

Reply PM #417

PM, I don`t think that it`s entirely fair to blame ordinary people in Pakistan for not changing their laws when they don`t feel they are just. In India we DO largely get the Governments (and so the laws) that we deserve because all of India`s Government`s have been voted in (and will eventually be voted out). In Pakistan the ``will of the people`` is - at least at this point - not clear at all (in the quantified sense of so many votes equal a member of parliament, at least). They didn`t vote for Zia, he took power with a military coup. Similarly nobody voted for Mushy (credit: Shankar, v clever).

All laws are made in response to political pressure. Without consistent elections the only political pressure that can be brought to bear is the threat of violence. That is to say your average citizen who is not likely to pick up a gun (probably doesn`t have a gun) has no direct influence. The army and other organisations which can threaten violence do.

[I`m not saying that this doesn`t happen in India - see Shiv Sena behaviour in Maharashtra, for example - only that fair elections ensure that ordinary people are eventually heard, and that their voice is usually accorded the moral weight it deserves. The aberration in Kashmir is not just a tragedy for Kashmiris, it equally saps a democracy - which is largely functional - ACROSS India.]

Also - it is not always easy or safe to speak against a religious fundamentalist agenda (of any religion) in India, despite the safeguards which exist. Can you imagine the consequences of doing so in Pakistan? You don`t have to approve, or even excuse, the outcome, but perhaps you might have a little sympathy for people in that situation?

anNy #420 ``but please do yourself some justice ...and be a lil more nicer to the others``

Good advice. I think I`ll take it too :-).

(I seem to be getting into too many dumb arguments on chowk as well).

To all the people I have been mean at one time or another on chowk, these being (I have a good memory): ylh, urstruly, sadna, hamidm, ali1, jay (well, maybe not jay, OK even jay), PM: like the Roman Catholic Pope, I am so very sorry. so sorry for hurting your feelings. so really, really sorry.

And now in Japanese: solly, solly (oooops, I am being politically incorrect there).

live long and prosper. have a great life.

Thanks anNY.

anNy #420

``friend, my lil cuppycake...u might elicit a chuckle here and there...but please do yourself some justice (or your original handle) and be a lil more nicer to the others...its no fun reading chowk and getting angry at someones budtameezee and insolence...and if you must diss even then, plz do it with some class ... all my love sugah, anNy``

Sweetie,

Didn`t you notice that I came down to your buddy`s class. I can come even down to your class if you want

(but no, I don`t want any disease).

Studebaker #414

``I understand ,you already declared it your last post ,BUT as Friend,let me request you NOT to address someone ,who may or may not be elder than you ,as ``sweetie pie`` or refer to there writing as ``defaecate`` & such quiet obvious inappropriate words.``

Dear Studebaker,

Thanks. I would have agreed with you for anyone else. But didn`t you notice this female herself calling others with very cute sounding names.

Didn`t you find anything objectionable with Roach post of Tahmed and this female`s ``applause``. Did you notice her arrogance while pointing out ``I don`t think you are a lady`` to Sadna.

She should now enjoy a stronger dose of her own medicine.

Thanks again for your advise.

tahmed321 #413

``friend: #409 I think by now you have amply demonstrated the gutter you grew up in.``

My poor peace-maker Ahmek,

Buddy, I just took your advise to Sadna, went to your barber and got your roach blood. Now I am also a roach like you. You don`t enjoy any company.

(BTW, now you find gutter in my posts. You forgot your own roachy reply to Sadna.)

tahmed321 #407

``Actually I have not read the article (nor do I think I will)....``

Bravo! So you start discussing a thread without knowing the context. Yaar, guru ho tum!

Reply Sadna #406

You`re welcome. And your apologies are totally unnecessary - I find you entirely inoffensive and usually great fun to read. I also think that while your debating style is (dare I say) a little combative, you are rarely rude, and you are quite even handed.(as per your posting #422.) Not that you asked, of course...

I will say, however, that I find this disagreement between you and tahmed321 quite confusing, as he is one of the other Chowk wallahs whose postings I find generally thoughtful and insightful and tolerant. Perhaps it`s an issue of style rather than substance?

Also perhaps a reminder that much as we feel we know and understand people from the other side of the border, there are some compulsions and assumptions that we do not understand or instinctively make? As Indians, a military Government is intellectually comprehendable to us, but we have NO IDEA what it feels like and how that would affect our basic outlook on things. I`m sure there are similar things about us that Pakistanis wouldn`t immediately understand. Not that we CAN`T understand, just that it takes more effort to than it usually does.

Re: Zahra 419;

Very wise. Interactions much more informative and lively.

Studebaker #415
Here is a reference I came across a while ago:
www.truthindia.com
Scroll down left column:
Ram. R Punyani
Khaki Prejudice
This article quotes studies done by govt. functionaries in this matter. What is required is public pressure on political leaders in office.

MaheshG: I had been meaning to respond to your two posts addressed to me. On the first one: I believe it is a common Hindu prayer (the one I mentioned). I read the English translation only. I guess I will ask someone who is more familiar with Hindu prayers. On the second one: I assume that Aisha and some other chowk poster would have said something about Muslims being ``better`` than non-Muslims. I have been saying that this is not true on the basis of the Quran - the Quran makes this amply clear. Trouble is people have confused the Quran with all sorts of man-made notions. So: it depends on which Islam one is talking about - the Islam as conveyed by the Holy Prophet as being the message of God, or the Islam that has had tradition, heresay and so forth added on. By all logic, the Quran has to be (per muslim belief) the sole source. As long as one appreciates the difference, I have no problem. But when someone keeps insisting that ``muslims are required`` to do things that are not in the Quran, as is done regularly by otherwise intelligent people, then I do have a problem: Then we are prisoners of the past, of a thousand years of primitive human societies, and that is what we are neither obliged as muslims, nor should as sensible human beings, allow ourselves to become.

Hope this makes you understand why I resent Sadna`s refusal to accept any version of Islam other than the worst kind.

zahra:

((Recently, some regular interactors have started weaing a garb and have been posting nonsense messages right and left as they *lacked * the nerve to do so under their real names. How manly on their behalf!))

i agreee zahra..all these people especially ab nd fc k2 fokat fokat initials pop up whenever theres an all out indopakistan phadda, spreading grime all over the place..these people say all of this without having established themselves as interactors with distinct personalities and thus the obviousness...its not nice :(

friend, my lil cuppycake...u might elicit a chuckle here and there...but please do yourself some justice (or your original handle) and be a lil more nicer to the others...its no fun reading chowk and getting angry at someones budtameezee and insolence...and if you must diss even then, plz do it with some class

all my love sugah,

anNy