When the Lights Hurt the Eyes

Fatimah #326 ``Yarab na woh samjhe haine, Na samjhen gey mere baat, Dey aur AQAL Aur Unko ...``

Right. To understand you FAR greater intelligence than I possess. People spend their entire lives trying to understand the thinking of a worm...:-)

re: harpreet

...fawad`s right...go to goa...you`ll LOVE it...party town of asia i tell you...if u like spicy seafood, you`ll love it even more...

re: fawad

...ibiza ain`t all that...too many brits on drugs...

Posted: Nov-25-01 15:1:54 EST Reply #: 312

Urstruly

``I remember one shab-e-barat when I was in Lahore with my parents. That is when I met her. She was 8 and I was 9. I still remember seeing the reflection of phul jhari in her big bright eyes that night. As if that was not enough she took me with her to their neighbors house the next day. The neighbor was Allama Inayat ullah Mashriqi who had died years before I was born but my father and uncles used to mention his name with utmost respect. And so was she when she told me where we were going. It was a pink winter afternoon. Allma`s daughter and her family were on the rooftop sunbathing as is the custom in our part of the world in winters. She held my hand and took me to the kitchen and stole two pieces of mango achaar from a big jar. She gave me one and licked the other one. I am not sure why I still remeber this little incident; whether it was Allama`s daughter who made the best achaar I ever had or it was my little thief who used to shut her eyes so closely whenever she licked the achaar and felt its sour taste.``

Urstruly,

What is this pricosous behaviour at 9yrs of age ,in you that keep surfacing.You in of your Article,narrated love affair (crush) with your 7th grader teacher ,who co incidently is now living in Toranta only a 5cent /min call away from you .

Ther is a name for such precosousness,`dil phek` or ``skirt chasing`` are you still doing that ?

How is your WRIST?

Posted: Nov-25-01 15:1:54 EST Reply #: 312

Urstruly

``I remember one shab-e-barat when I was in Lahore with my parents. That is when I met her. She was 8 and I was 9. I still remember seeing the reflection of phul jhari in her big bright eyes that night. As if that was not enough she took me with her to their neighbors house the next day. The neighbor was Allama Inayat ullah Mashriqi who had died years before I was born but my father and uncles used to mention his name with utmost respect. And so was she when she told me where we were going. It was a pink winter afternoon. Allma`s daughter and her family were on the rooftop sunbathing as is the custom in our part of the world in winters. She held my hand and took me to the kitchen and stole two pieces of mango achaar from a big jar. She gave me one and licked the other one. I am not sure why I still remeber this little incident; whether it was Allama`s daughter who made the best achaar I ever had or it was my little thief who used to shut her eyes so closely whenever she licked the achaar and felt its sour taste.``

Urstruly,

What is this pricosous behaviour at 9yrs of age ,in you that keep surfacing.You in of your Article,narrated love affair (crush) with your 7th grader teacher ,who co incidently is now living in Toranta only a 5cent /min call away from you .

Ther is a name for such precosousness,`dil phek` or ``skirt chasing`` are you still doing that ?

How is your WRIST?

Re: #316

DRUMZ,

Me: ``How can I `meditate on a concept`? Is that not the same as `concentration`...plain old `thinking` ?``

You: ``Its the opposite. Thinking is more left brain oriented. The answers to your question always come from a technique u already know (if your just thinking). Meditation is more right brained oriented, you let a NEW answer come into you by vibrating at the right frequency (ie. by relaxing). Buddhist`s achieve enlightenment by pondering a difficult question for years (why is there evil). Once the answer comes to them they are considered to be enlightened.``

Not quite sure what you mean. Understanding comes either, 1) when you re-arrange existing data or, 2) when you get new data or, 3) both. Since by sitting quietly meditating somewhere, no new data comes to me, does it mean I already have all the data in my head to solve the problems of my life? To experience truth.

Now I understand by meditation you mean `relaxing`. But...keeping a question in your mind continuously is not relaxing - but highly stressful. How can you relax and yet have the mind focussed on one question ???

regards,

Aamir Ansari (#303):

I think this “healthy dose of hope and shine” that you talk about is evident in most of Sai Paranjpye’s movies, including ‘Sparsh’, my personal favourite, in which both Naseer and Shabana excelled with their subtle performances. About ‘Katha’, I loved those little touches, like Deepti wearing a shoe-flower in her hair and braiding them in two ‘double chotis’ or Farooque Sheikh playing the no-income dandy twirling the keys and asking for “thodi light chai”. I can watch this movie over and over again, as also ‘Chashme Baddoor’. If you get an opportunity, do see Benegal’s ‘Samar’, a film within a film about the Dalits; I think he has surpassed many of his earlier efforts with this one. Alas, I don’t think it has got a theatrical release at all.

You have talked about some film being available in Karachi – can you tell me how popular such off-the-beaten-track films are there?

Urstruly (#312):

Jab poori mehfil so gayee, aap ab jaag rahe ho!! Khair, it is good to be woken up to the strains of “Chupke chupke…”, because then raat aur din ka fark maalum hi nahin padhta.

Do you really think this is my best so far here? Well, at least the usual suspects did not turn up to give me a piece of their rusted minds. In that respect it was my cleanest Board. Kuchh pakeezgee ka ehsaas humein bhi to hua :)

I loved your little naazuk experience. Do you still feel like you are nine?? I do hope so. Tell me, during shab-e-baraat, do people in Pak also put those wishing chits in balls of aata (flour) and immerse it in the sea? I know of some who do it here in Bombay. I think it is very sweet.

Regards,

Farzana

saminashah #215 Thanks.

Fatimah #214 I am afraid that by name-calling (``TAhmed= mad hat`` ``Bootlicking Hindu Feet Touching reverence for Non muslim teachers`` ``DAHERIYA (atheist)``) you are not proving anything other than the fact that you easily resort to name-calling.

Your post is incoherent and pointless. And pointing to some website and quoting meaninglessly from the Koran does not substitute for a coherent or meaningful post.

Islam Misunderstood

Khalid Khan



If language is a mode to express things and communicate with fellow human beings, then perhaps linguistics and lexicons know better how difficult and inadequate they find themselves when they have to translate and understand the meaning of a word from the text to the context, from one language to another, or elicit the implicit meaning from within a word itself into an explicit, distinct, appropriate unambiguous form. The task remains challenging yet never achievable, not because we lack the means and method to do it, but because of the very nature of its usage. Its growth in a given culture and society in which it is used keeps the perennial challenge alive as to how to interpret it in the light of changing circumstances and with the growth and development of society. This very difficulty of interpretation of language, more particularly religious texts, has been the root of all misunderstanding. Not only have the subjective elements of individuals or groups colored their own interests while throwing light on the meaning of the text, but this was and is still being surreptitiously distorted, misinterpreted by the `other` in their race for dominance and superiority and for serving their own interests. It is due to the limitation of human language that, more often than not, the meaning of the religious text has got lost in the encyclopedia of its own school of interpretation. Realizing this paradoxical dilemma of not having a consensus on the meaning of its own text, radical elements within and outside the Semitic religions had zealously and relentlessly tarnished and damaged its counterparts for its own sustenance and existence. It has become the maxim of Semitic religions that “misunderstandings to be followed as a rule with others.” Very often we have seen through history that the basic, inherent tendency of Semitic religions like Islam, Christianity and Judaism is to exclude the `other` from itself and by implication it means to attract within its fold as many people as it is possible to maintain its superiority over the others. And to be superior in the material world is to be in control of at least the resources, economy, technology, trade and all other things attached to it that would give to its followers dignity, better living standards and a superior value system. Since there was no uniformity in the process of bringing within its fold new groups of believers, they had to face each other within the same ethnic cultural groups of people like the Arab Muslims and the Arab Christians. Because of the change in their belief systems and religion, they started having more in common and felt alike with those who shared their beliefs and their new religion than with those with whom they had shared ethnically the same world view earlier. This paved the way for more complicated reorganization of people in terms of their religious world views within the Semitic religions, and as such an urgency for adjustment of each other`s interest arose wherever confrontation had to be avoided. This situation arose within the same ethnic groups, where Semitic religion came to take its root together and also where different ethnic groups who were completely under the fold of one Semitic religion had to encounter the other Semitic or non-Semitic religion. So long as there was some internal understanding and balance of interest within the Semitic religion for protecting their own interest either through debate, dialogue or conciliation, we witnessed periods of peace in history. But the day disgruntled elements decided to subvert the balance and attempted to annihilate the `other` or retard the growth of the other, we have umpteen examples in our pages of world history that speak volumes about the destruction and tragedy that both sides had to suffer. So what is happening in the world today is nothing new; it should neither shock nor surprise us. It is the logical extension of the same attitude that has ramified into our political and social ideology. However, only the backdrop has changed. The attitude is colored now with the complicated network of science, technology, economic development, world security, human rights, terrorism, free state, etc., which in its intrinsic sense has nothing to do with religion or religious beliefs, but has its own inherent values and forces that it generates by itself. The western world in general, and America in particular, though finding itself still deep-rooted in its religion and its belief systems, was farsighted and more practical in its approach when it realized that it was impossible to resolve multiple religious aspirations in the light of its own emerging social realities, created by a multi-cultural and multi-ethnic set up, and complicated further by the advancement in science and technology. They relegated religion into the personal sphere of life realizing the practical existential difficulties they would have to resolve if this was not done. But applying religious meaning would be suicidal to these new realities. This is not because the values adhered to within religions cannot explain the modern phenomena, but because of the diverse opinions within itself about -- what is religion? What is the value attached to it? Whether religion should regulate our total life? Do all religions have something universal, etc. These are so vexatious and complicated that anybody and everybody could use God or Allah as a pretext for justification of his personal or collective deeds or misdeeds. We are all civilized and cultured during times of peace when we are in total control of our interest and when there is no immediate threat to the same, but in a crisis, our rationality takes a back seat. Instinctively human beings try to incite a sense of arousal in their surroundings to generate a mass support, identifying their personal problems with the sympathy of the overwhelming collective. Rationalizing, justifying cannot arouse this common excitement. Even if it does, we have seen that the impact is miniscule because of the difference of opinion that it always creates in the process of arriving at any understanding. And the limitation of people or groups that would react would always depend on the level of education and the political or social ideology they subscribe to. As such human emotion becomes the most potential victim of vested interest groups and radical elements in Semitic religions. And if the subject matter to which emotions would be directed is divinity, then history is a witness as to how “rationality” has been time and again imprisoned or brutally murdered for revealing the misdeeds of rulers, administrators, powerful nations who had taken religion for a terrible ride, when their economic crises had to be averted, political justifications were to be given and when lust for power and dominance were driving them to hell. Why equate Islam with terrorism then? It is a fact that Islam has been misused by elements within itself for furthering their own interests. But this is also true with the vested interests in all the religions. The danger in equating Islam with terrorism would amount to committing a serious mistake. This is because Islam is geographically and politically distributed throughout the globe and amounts to one third of the global population and the aggrieved elements happen to be within the Islamic countries. These aggrieved elements are reacting to the incapability and complacency of their own respective governments to protest against the Western military and economic dominance over their land and oil. It is this peculiar situation that all Islamic countries are unable to face. The growing dissenting voices within these countries actually fuel small connected groups of people who find it easy to identify with each other in religious terms to fight against the western dominance. The fact that even Islamic countries have joined the world forces against these isolated groups proves that even they want world peace. The real issue involved here is the vast disparity between the techno-haves and the have-nots, between monopolization and self-assertions, between nuclear powers and non nuclear powers, between extra-territorial domination and no territory and between the exploiter and the exploited. How do we manage our natural resources that are unequally distributed in diverse geographical locations? How do we reach the benefit of scientific knowledge to the remotest parts of our society? How do we bridge our ideological differences and economic inequalities? There is no denying the fact that our social scientists, environmentalists, economists, NGOs and other social bodies are working extremely hard in understanding and giving practical shape and direction to resolve this. If left unaddressed and unresolved, this will sooner or later destroy our social and economic structure and chaos would be imminent. No religion, ethics, morality or values can save us then. We will have to be doomed to live in a perennial state of insecurity, dread, poverty exploitation, terrorism and deprivation. Terrorism in any form is bad. The pulse of terrorism lies deep rooted in our society. It is created out of inequality and deprivation. The motivating force of terrorism is mutually generated by the perpetrator and the victim. This drives the aggrieved sections of the society to resort to all possible means to fight against the powerful aggressor by any means. But, the moment we start justifying any act of violence, we know it opens up a plethora of questions along with it. Why is there terrorism? Who should define terrorism? What type of terrorism we talking about? Is the society itself responsible for creating it? What is the remedy? There are diverse opinions among intellectuals and they are yet to arrive on any common understanding about it. But they do agree that the issue is about people, technology, agencies, radical elements and vested groups who have capabilities to generate terror cutting across all man-made boundaries. The medium to transmit this terror can be religion, culture, technology, and ideology. As such it is a human problem, an issue of our society which involves the security of our nation. And we all know that human beings are as diverse as the universe itself. The society in which we are living and the world that is emerging is made up of a cross section of people, culture and values. And our nation itself is a fragile man-made entity, where its general health depends upon how every section contributes to adjusting and balancing its respective interests, irrespective of its own religious, cultural and ethnic background. So it would be suicidal on the part of any aware individuals or groups who know that they are living in the multi cultural, religious and multi ethnic society, where progressive mindsets and radical elements play hide and seek every now and then, to generalize any act of violence in terms of religion, ethnicity and culture on any particular group of people. Scientific attitude towards life itself has brought out a class of people in every society. These people, irrespective of their religious or cultural background, participate and identify themselves with each other more zealously than with their own ethnic or religious counterparts. As such this progressive group of people will have to play a vital role in reforming their own society. Our society has made great sacrifices in reaching a state where it maintains a delicate balance between the progressive mindset and the radical elements. No irrational mind should be allowed to disturb this balance. This again is because we don`t have a choice. If we want to live peacefully and if we aspire for progress and development then balancing the needs and aspirations of our society is a necessity and not something which we can luxuriously afford to discuss and desire. It is this balancing of interests that is relevant in maintaining global peace in terms of resources, technology and information. The accountability question lies more on the western world and America in particular because they are at the vanguard of all the scientific, technological advancement in the world today. Have they been maintaining the balance of interest in the world today? Certainly not! Do they have the moral strength and character to admit to the duality of their foreign policy? And have we ever objected to that? No, we were complacent! Will they be civilized enough to admit that they had their share in the creation of Osama bin Laden and the Taliban to neutralize the Russian factor during the Cold War. Certainly they must be regretting it now. Should the price for being opportunist, indifferent and complacent to rights, justice, deprivation and forced occupation be so colossal that thousands of lives of innocent civilians had to be taken in the most horrifying manner to wake up the conscience of humanity that under the garb of Globalization and Free World something wrong was being seriously committed? Certainly not!

``I remember one shab-e-barat when I was in Lahore with my parents...``

What is Shab e Barat??

Sadna: ``I donot know what is written in the Vedas, but I think the theory generally says there is the `inherent nature of things` or prakriti, and then there is the `Absolute`. This doesnot mean that right is the same as wrong, it means both right and wrong and all in between are the building blocks and elements of creation.``

I see, that makes sense. The absolute is not restriced by right and wrong, yet we are because we live in the finite? I know u said dont ask about the absolute, but I gotta. It is said that through good work, one will (re)unite with the 1. Does this not suggest that the absolute is responsible for the `inherent nature of things.`

By this is mean, not simply constructing them, but making them the WAY they are (does the absolute also not dileneate between good and bad?)

``Discrimination is also needed as a step toward `realising` that the `inherent nature of things` which actually provides living beings their motive power, good or bad, is not the same thing as the underlying eternal or unchanging `Absolute`, like `dust on a mirror`?``

What do you think the relationship is then? does our finite existence not have absolute consequences (uniting with the 1)?

Hamzad: ``Yes God from German Gott which from Aryan root:khoD & hence Khodaa.(Iran means Aaryan)

Khud in urdu/farsi is written as Khod but is pronounced as khud in urdu & KhOd in farsee.``

I apologize, i didn`t know the two were connected.

Tahmed: I like that concept a lot. Most religions do look at God as being the architect, yet the problem with such a view is that its not explicit in its ``guidance.`` For the `jahils,` religion needed details of what to do and how-a structure, with consequences for all actions. Not all people can form an ideology based on what they percieve, and religion wouldnt allow it because people lack the discipline to do so. It puts the responsibility of justice upon each of us, rather then a centralized state/faith.

God is not hidden between the binding of an esoteric text, not does she appear from hiding after a set number of rukas. God is everywhere, astronomy (even in chaos theory there is order) and mathematices especially.

PS: Your build with Fatima (RA) is Jokes. Imagine a slave glorifying her life to a free man...

Aryan: ``Thanks for your ideas...but this is going nowhere...fast.``

May I recommend a dope book? Dr Suess` 5 steps to Enlightenment, pop up edition. Mcgraw Hill publishing: New York, 1982.

LOL, what Im trying to say is that what you`re asking for are the answers to questions which have puzzled humanity for THOUSANDS of years. You cant ask such a question without appreciating it first. The concept of Know Thyself arose first in Egypt (by Imhotep 2500 BC), where people would meditate on Self for literally decades.

Knowledge of Self (KOS) is much more than your name, or where u were born. It aims to explain your purpose in this life game. More importantly, it shows you why u act the way u do in an attempt to have u conquer your lower self. This requires discipline of the strongest degree. The shpynx embodies KOS by having a human face atop a lions body (conquering ones animal nature). A book which explains this far better is Metu Neter Vol 1.

``How can I `form an idea of what truth is` if I don`t know jack about it.``

Thats not possible. Forget objective truths for a sec, everyone has an instinctual idea of what subjective truths are. People dont need laws and commandments to know that killing another person is wrong. Such action arises from the absense of Love (God). Morals/ethics are subjective truths. The unknown truth would be something like an absolute truth, which decieves us cuz we live in a finite world.

``How can I `meditate on a concept`? Is that not the same as `concentration`...plain old `thinking` ?``

Its the opposite. Thinking is more left brain oriented. The answers to your question always come from a technique u already know (if your just thinking). Meditation is more right brained oriented, you let a NEW answer come into you by vibrating at the right frequency (ie. by relaxing). Buddhist`s achieve enlightenment by pondering a difficult question for years (why is there evil). Once the answer comes to them they are considered to be enlightened.

nice one Tahmed

regards

-

-