Brahmin and Mullah

upman7626 re: 176.

Mona understood, like most people on Chowk would what I meant when I said ``Glad you have pathetic spellings`` I forgot to add ``too`` and I did say ``details later`` incase she would not get what I was trying to say. You wasted your time and energy trying to be the good guy with your, you-are-the-pathetic-speller. In your attempt to be superman you are still as unimpressive as you were or will be. However there is always the hope of change.

I certainly do not believe that my ``use of Language is very literary`` hence no, I am not arrogant about that. I, however have no doubts about what I express and feel, and if you notice I have only defended that. In addition I have accepted my bad spellings as I have my imperfection of writing style. Its the likes of you who pay attention to the package than what`s inside.

If you have a problem with something I guess it is the fact that I can be chilling and appear mean towards Indians for the reason they are Indians, sometimes it is also extended to the people who have OCD regarding put downs. I am guilty of being overly reactionary in these matters because events have conditioned me to be so, however, on my sane moments away from Chowk, I know that it is not mature. And I am not perfect ;) but I know that I will improve. Though your off-target whining will not help.

And had you known how to read, you`d understand the comment about Albert Einstein was in context to the importance of a social system with the contribution of everyone for the greater good. And not his love for Hinduism, that, I believe is his personal stuff. If one could justify the highness of a moral code based on preference of an Individual than Islam is the best due to people like The Messenger Mohammed (P), Jinnah, Attaturk, Mohammed Ali, Malcom X, Professor Abdus Salam etc...And I believe you just exposed your childish line of thought as a by product of your ``Einstien loves India and Hinduism.``

What a shame!

Aisha Fayyazi Sarwari.

RE: Reply #: 171 Eklavya

[Aeisha # 156

``This definition becomes a little narrow in Hinduism. It is currently narrow in Islam but hat is because the ideal has been steadily abandoned…on the contrary Hinduism is inertly that.``]

I said that, not Aeisha.

[If Islam regains its ideal of universal brotherhood (not just Islamic brotherhood, which I am sure you would agree must only be a distortion) and Hinduism overcomes its genuine problems of caste etc, we would be be together, don`t you think?]

I certainly hope differences could melt away because we have similar problems. History has not shown hope.

I think the problem lies in the fundamentals of the religions.

a) Hinduism is much more ancient than Islam.

b) Islam is still perhaps got a while to go before it looses its venom of breaking the patterns.

c) The concept of one source of life vs. the idea of multiple sources, often symbolic sources of life in Hinduism.

d) The caste system in Hinduism is something that in my opinion is noting bad as such if we seek to understand the idea of survival back then. Huxley, Aldous in his book, ``A brave new world`` explains so beautifully how this stratification helps in the development of a society already so advanced, that`s aim is only consumption. that vs. Islam`s idea of equality perhaps needed to scrape quiet a few structures if it needed to take effect.

e) Lack of symbolism in Islam is antagonistic to the very life blood of Hinduism.

So, with these fundamentals so polarized, no matter how much assimilation there is, the orthodox in each group will only encourage any attempt to create a mixture to be insoluble. The partition was the separation of this insolubility after long years of attempting to find a law that allows both substances (religions) to be in place and settled.

I guess I differ here, that the idea is not to overcome our inert belief systems but to let us hold them dear as we find our role in the service of our Nations. To seek to understand and work together with people whose belief system doesn’t entangle in the web of who`s God is cooler or like Upman used the Ad populam fallacy with Einstein, but to judge success by which group of people are able to walk with everyone regardless of their color caste or creed to secure what lies within the borders that surround them.

Aisha Sarwari

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

re. Klutz #181

``I need no priest to ask for God`s forgiveness on my behalf!I also know that i dont need no idols to concentrate.I have enough between my ears to know that those man-made idols are just that.Man-Made! How can something which you created yourself has the power to shape your lives.I also know that i dont need to worship fire,or wind,or water. Everything is between me and my Allah.I will ask Him for help and i will ask Him for forgiveness.``

So you have a ``direct`` relationship with ``your`` Allah. How is that any better or any worse than an interceded one, other than for the reason that your Mommy told you so?

Ok, assuming a direct connection is preferrable to `your Allah`, what makes your Allah any less of an idol than one made of brick and mortar? Is tangibility a requirement for idolatry? Why is Bhagwan -- or YWH-- my autie`s favorite God -- and less of an idol than Allah?

Now. please don`t get me wrong... I`m not just trying to ridicule you, klutz... but Freankly, I am tired of hearing Christains and Muslims claim some sort of moral superiroty on the basis of their believe in ONE God, as if there was some inherent supreme moral virtue in that particular number. I am aware of the significance of Unity which underscores not just the orignial Judeo-Christo-Islamic insistence on that number but is also t obe found in Hindu and Buddhist Philosphy (despite teh outer appearances of many deities. Even the various Native American tribes, with their scores of seities, pay homage to one great Ultimate (a rough approximation of the Christian/Muslim God).

All very well, as long as there is some sort of experience attached to the concept. The Hebrews were very aware of how easily Yahweh could be turned into an idol -- not by the construction of some stone representation, but by conceptualizing without an underlying experience. Concepts, after all, can be as empty as words.

So, my dear klutz (not to sound condescending)... perhaps you will give some more thought to these matters before you feel feel that sense of superiority associated with the number One, or the idolized form of the reality to which Allah/God/Baghwan/Yahweh point.

rgds,

PM

---------

AEisha #190

``Except for Sir Syed ,majority of muslims for good or for bad ,were ideologically at logger head with christian culture of booze music,dance,gambling etc.``

hmmmm.... judging from the results of a culture in which booze, music, dance and gambling are strictly prohibited ion ideological grounds, is it really a quesstion of whether is was ``for Good or for bad``??

re. Klutz #180

``If one believes in Allah then he should also believe in HIS words. Quran is Allah`s words. there is nothing supposedly said in it. Allah said that HE will protect HIS book. No one can change HIS words even if one trys to do so.``

Like I said bfore, Ms Klutz.. I see no problem in believeing in Allah, but not believing THAT the Quran is Allah`s word perfected. Your logic is a little strange, frankly. Even if I do follow your logic that ``If one believes in Allah then he should also believe in HIS words.``, there does not automatically follow that (a) ``Quran is Allah`s words.``, or , even assuming it WAS, that it would be perfect, especially given our knowledge nowadays of the history of the Quran (never mind everything that mom and Dad told you about not one nukta being changed etc.)

#218

``anyway im tired of this never ending discussion...its really not going anywhere...``

And I thought it was only just getting interesting! :) But really klutz, you really started it... Of course you are rntitled to your beliefs, but when you air them, you naturally are provoking a debate. and it is much easier to defend a statement such as ``Islam (or any system) is not perfect`` than to refute it. Anyway, agreeing to disagree is a default condition when arguing about such metaphysics. The best we can hope to do is think a little deeper on through being questioned and provoked.

sincerely

- - - - - - - - -

re. Studebaker #184

``Also Mohommed has word from god ,Allah that it is still better to be a sinfull muslim ,than a pious non believer .You can plead for a muslim but even mohommed cannot plead for non muslims.``

And you know all this because who told you so?

Dr Hoodbhoy thanks for a great article.

I have followed your writings for a long time and i was really gratified to see you on american tv during a news programme recently, you are much younger then i thought.Keep up the good work! I hope u will interact.

If I may add my two dimes worth:

I think we need to get away from the mindset of viewing the western block in general and the U.S in particular as a monolith and our enemy they are neither.We live in a small world akin to a neighbourhood some neghbours have more then others.

like or not U.S is the center of the universe for all humanity now and for a long time to come.

The principals of democracy and individual freedom that have taken root on this soil are universal and all mankind can partake of it, and will.Inshallah.

The myth that the western block was decadent and was going to fall to pieces when challenged has been shattered.

The good news is that the so called west is no longer populated by any particular ethnic group or religious group, it is a club with membership open to all who believe in these principals.

A notice to those who oppose it,do so at your own peril.

Klutz #215, 218

Everthying in this world is imperfect. When God was unable to make a perfect world how could he/ she give us a perfect religion?

At one time Christanity was the fastest growing religion and some other point of time Budhism was and maybe at some other time some other religion has been. So you see even if Islam is the fastest growing one right now, it could be that it might be usurped by something else tomorrow. No offence intended.

Anyway as you say, even I am fed up with this heavy religious discussion. Especially, when I come to think of it that I am not particularly a very religious person.

Mona

Indeed it is amazing that the same Indians who claim that Islam is intolerant and at war with the world, are also, in the lead to be intolerant towards Islam.

These same ``tolerant`` Indians do not wish to discuss the intolerance of the Caste system; an idea integral to Hinduism. That persons exist to serve others in a higher caste. That such persons may never escape the cycle of birth, servitide and rebirth and servitude...

These same Indians say they have outlawed caste, as if they had brought it into existence by proclaiming a law. These same Indians say that caste has little functionality in ``secular`` India. Most Hindu girls interested in marriage will tell you what caste the family name of a propective groom is, which Indian State it is prevalent in. And note the kinds of vocations available to lower castes - And imagine that this applies to more than a billion human souls. Would it be intolerance to set the captives free?

These same Indians, while hurlings insults and non truths at Islam and Muslims, seem never to discuss the idea of redemption, forgiveness, mercy and compassion. They argue Muslims must not love Muslims first, no brotherhood of the Ummah, no! these same Indians who do base so many simple decisions and functions of daily life, influenced by caste, they suggest Islam is intolerant. Where minorities have few rights. They offer ``secular`` India where minorities have tremendous freedoms - ask the Kashmiri - Ask the Christian converts - ask the tribals -

They say Muslims cannot live as minorities among other peoples (Isn`t that a very tolerant view?) and therefore use of lethal force against them is justified and in the same breath, they emphasize that they are same as those against whom they exercise lethal coersion (Now, isn`t that tolerant?) ``I affirm that as a secularist I love you, but as a secularist, I feel the imperative to use lethal force against you, because you love your coreligionist`` - Isn`t that tolerant?

Rejoice Muslims! those that do hate you are ignorant - in the name of tolerance and secularism, they do practice intolerance and derive justification for it by religion!

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

SOCIAL CONDITIONING UNDER ISLAM,

Kafir is a word unique to islam, it identifies all others who are not muslims. A non muslim cannot state from experience, but in the early child hood it should be damn difficult to spot an non muslim in pakistan, charecterise him/her and define a kafir. That is why the pak curriculum insists on the childrens ability to identify a hindu. Kafir and the TNT are complementary concepts.

Closely linked to the kafir is the concept of jihad. Every religion bestows the best on the true follower of the religion, usually the heaven and this is reserved for the jihadist.

PM 225

I am hurt to read such a post come from you - please reconsider

Idol :

1. A image

2. A representation or symbol of an object of worship; broadly: a false God

3. A pretender, Imposter

4. A form or appearance visible but without substance.

5. False conception, a fallacy.

Do any of these fit the monotheist tradition`s description of God? Please reconsider.

Hobbyty,

Are muslims being bombed just because they love fellow Muslims? Can you substantiate that please.

Hindus are unwilling to discuss the caste system? Can you point specifically to any?

So, how do you think that Hindus should get rid of this scourge of a caste system? If you have any better ideas other than outlawing it in the constitution please let us know.

Hobbyty, so are all idol worshippers idiots?

Hobbytv,

{{Indeed it is amazing that the same Indians who claim that Islam is intolerant and at war with the world, are also, in the lead to be intolerant towards Islam.}}

Listen, Mr Holier-than-thou pal, we hindus can say the same thing about some of the muslim posts on this thread. If Islam claims that their followers should respect all religions, how come some of the Islamic stalwarts on Chowk are intolerant to other religions?

Havent you champions of Allah insulted Hindus & Christians here?! You look down upon idol worship of hindus & the ``booze, song & dance`` of Christians. You seem absolutely oblivious to such statements (& many more) that have cropped up, not just on this thread , but for the last several years. I`m not saying we hindus are respectful to muslims---NOT AT ALL, unfortunately. But dont tell me you muslims or Pakistanis are these very courteous, respectful & civil posters who attack ONLY when provoked.

Seems to me ,in Pakistan, when hinduism or India is insulted, nobody ever challenges those views. It is accepted very matter-of-factly. Its not even considered impolite. Cyberspace is a different ballgame. Indians & hindus will give just as much as they get. Dont like it, when you get a taste of your own medicine eh? Like my friend URstruly says, give respect to get respect. So when you bash other religions & countries, have the balls to get your religion & country bashed as well. And DONT tell me that its the Indians or the hindus who always start these fights!

Some of you muslims are ignorant of the core philosophy of hinduism--hindus believe in one supreme God too. We may symbolise Him in the form of idols & give Him many names; but we believe in the same God as you. When you muslims sanctimoniously say (or imply) ``our way of praying to God is the only TRUE way, & the rest of you are inferior, immoral, ignorant heathens``; you are behaving just like the brahmins who look down upon other castes.

Yeah, caste system is WRONG, very wrong. Dowry is wrong, sati is wrong, female infanticide is wrong (er hindu religion does`nt condone that). Yes, we are attempting to correct the wrongs in our religion by passing laws. Is that enough? has the problem been solved--heck NO! But were trying. At least we have the BALLS to admit the faults in our religion.

Islam is PERFECT is`nt it? God forbid if anybody has the balls to point out its imperfections in Pakistan--his arse is in jail for blasphemy. Those who deviate from the dominant discourse of Islam are OUTCAST. Ask an Ahmedi or a Qiadiani---they are OUTCAST. God help them if they have the BALLS to call themselves muslims! Wow! What a perfect tolerant religion!!

Who is MORE perfect Sunnis or Shias? In your zeal to demonstrate that either is perfect, you even KILL each other! Allah must be very very proud of HIS favourite children, when they HATE each other & find reason to comit murder during one of your religious festivals---all in the name of HIS glory. Wah! Wah! Subhanallah!

Among Sunnis, who is MORE perfect--the deobandis, barevalis or wahabbis? Er, where do the sufis fall in the arguement of PERFECTION? Islam does`nt have a caste system. But you sure as heck have a SECT SYSTEM. Islam is Egalitarian, only in THEORY--in practice? MY FOOT! When a hindu refuses to marry into another caste--he`s goddamned shameless, as far as I`m concerned. JUST as shameless as a sunni refusing to marry a shia or an ahmedi; or vice versa. Dont tell me that doesnt happen.

So ALL muslims follow a PERFECT religion. But let me remind you of one tiny little fact---some muslims are MORE PERFECT than others.

So, you PERFECT children of Allah, I freely admit, we hindus have many, many things about our religion we are ashamed about. But we get pissed off when you holier-than-thou perfect assholes have the BALLS to stand in judgement of us. If you think Allah has given you the right to think you are better than everybody else; guess what -- you`re wrong.

tahmed,

I am glad you liked it :). I was reading your post to Sarwari on the other board in which you spread pearls of idealism (which exist outside the gandhian framework also)... but let me say this.. in any marriage, there has to be compatibility which breeds admiration and love.

Compatibility comes with the oneness of mission, and hence I personally I would like Sarwari marry any Pakistani regardless of religion race caste or creed as long as their mission is one with mine, ie Progressive Modern Pakistan as one of the greatest nations on earth.

Bhartiya Musalman

Dont beat yourself so much.... there is a long list of rejected Indian Muslim Suitors from what I understand when it comes to Aisha Sarwari. Even if you had not been uneducated, biogted, fundamentalist, confused, unsophisticated, illiterate and Ugly like you are , your mission (creation of a pan islamic khilafat and the greater state of India) can never be same as Aisha`s whose goal from what I know is a modern Progressive strong and Sovereign Pakistan.

Waisay, you keep harping about Pakistan being a failed state... when educated intellectuals say it there are reasons to it? Why are you saying it? Because your ami abu (pita ji mata ji) said it? You keep talking of a common South Asian Muslim culture and then you declare two nation theory is false ... when culture was the basic premise of TNT.

So tell me why should Pakistan be dissolved?

1) Is it the Economy? Because till the 1990s we outperformed India, and until recently atleast we had a greater GDP per capita than India... If we are in a bad patch for 10 years, my training in Economics tells me that its not that big of a deal because did they dissolve US in the great depression when US was performing much worse than Pakistan? Latin American Countries have been in much worse crisis than Pakistan for decades with spiralling super duper inflations.... I havent heard of Mexico, or Argentina, or Chile, or Equador being dissolved? Mexico even has US next to it.... which is much more developed than India can ever be.

2) Is it the poverty? Because one visit will show you that Pakistan does not have slums like Calcutta... even in the heaviest populated city like Karachi which stands with in top 15 in the world. If Pakistan was a failed state how did Karachi a fishertown of 55 000 become a metropolitan of 15 million people in just 53 years? How did Lahore gets so developed? How did Pakistanis create a city out of scratch which is one of the most beautiful cities in the world ? Islamabad? ( and on a side noteHow come atleast one of the Pakistan`s airports, Quaid e Azam International Karachi, is voted as one of the most beautiful in the world?)

3) Is it the ethnic tension ? Because whereas Pakistan has at most 3 semi active ethnic movements, India has 17 indigenous independence Movements from what I know, and I can atleast name 5 different myself, but you wont hear from Yasser Hamdani that India should be dissolved... because I simply dont care.

4) Is it because Pakistan cant keep up with India`s defence expenditure, and Pakistan cant make ICBMs, well you`ve got me on that one ... but I hardly doubt Pakistan would be dissolved for that reason or many sane Indians (unlike yourself) would want it dissolved for that reason.

5) Is it because you are a confused Pan-Islamist Indian Muslim who wants to devise stupid plans to dissolve Pakistan just so that you can face your rejection from Aisha Sarwari, ... well dream on, because Pakistan will go on because it is a nation and it will live as a nation and die as a nation.

Long Live Pakistan .. Pakistan will live on till eternity INSHALLAH!

And to borrow from Ataturk`s famous Turk Nationalist statement ... `Lucky are those who can call themselves Pakistanis`.

Upman,

Does `Bhartiya Musalman` have the `intellectual rigor` that I lack? Because if it is, then I am glad that I lack such `intellectual rigor` (Read bigoted ignorance).

Long Live Pakistan

Monaseghal to Bhartiya Musalman:

`Your remark related to a muslim convert from lower caste is most uncalled for.`

YLH says : Caste Ideology is all pervasive (in the Indian Union) despite secularism(?), Democracy(?), Islam(?)... I believe that is the point of this article! You have to fix the basic societal structure.... harping an indigenous definition of secularism and democracy in schools is not going to cut it.