The Summer of ’69

hey.....its a fabulous one! funny and subtle! liked reading it!

an element of honesty comes through from within the story. as if written in a moment of grown-upness by a child. touching...

tipu:
``tumhara khoon khoon hamara khoon paani ! ``
Arre yaar, yeh dialogue film ke liye rehne dau!
I was merely contrasting an emotional change with an intellectual change.

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

dost mittar #193 So, on that happy note you and I can say good bye to this board.

tahmed32#192
I appreciate your reassurance:-)
Yes, there are converts to judaism, although the orthodoxy, like in hinduism does not permit conversions. And the motivation there may also be more than a change of heart. I dont think that jews are more religious than christians but they do have a stronger jewish identity.

dost mittar #190 In the US, there is also I think a large number of christians, particularly catholics, converting to judaism. One major reason is marriage: half the jewish weddings are with nonjews. According to the USA Today, there about 200,000 converts to judaism per year plus a few hundred thousand more ``undocumented converts`` to judaism, i.e. individuals who raise their children as jews. I think this reflects the fact that most jews tend to take their religion more seriously than christians (as do Greek Orthodox Christians, per the example I gave from the movie in my earlier post). Also, the two religions are closely related anyway.
Among muslims and hindus in the US, I know of a few intermarriages. In one, the hindu girl converted to Islam. In the other, the muslim girl technically stayed muslim, but in their house there have both hindu gods as well as Quranic calligraphy. That should be enough to give a heart attack to any hindu or muslim extremist!! But for ordinary people, I dont think it is a big deal. While they are merely acquaintances (I went only once to their house), I dont think they have lost even one muslim or hindu friend because the two got married and no one gave second thought to the interesting symbolism of both religions existing peacefully side by side.

As for the fire and brimstone part in the Quran, the visions of hell are indeed a bit scary in not just Islam but in the Christian tradition as well - Dante did not write the ``Inferno`` for nothing. But you can relax. The verse I always refer to is in Surah Baqarah which makes it crystal clear that you can be of any religion and still have no fear. As long as you (a) do good deeds on earth, (b) believe in the Judgement Day and (c) believe in the Creator. I have no doubt you are OK on (a). And (b) is essentially a metaphysical concept and to my mind it translate in real life terms into distinguishing between right and wrong. On (c), since the nature of God cannot be understood by man (per the Quran), it follows that in actionable terms it implies appreciating the manner he manifests himself: in other words, appreciating the immense universe and the incredible complexity at every level (stellar, planetary, molecular, atomic and particulate) that we as humans have been able to unravel so far. So, if I was born a hindu, I think I would feel quite comfortable being one as long as I did not do bad stuff, did not differentiate between right and wrong, and/or did not appreciate or express any interest in the marvellous creation within which we live. Being born a muslim, I am only sorry my fellow muslims dont do what you did: read the Quran not for gaining points with God but with an interest in understanding what it has to say.

dost-mittar #189
In Canada you donot have Hindutva-vadis.

ali87 #187

`` they can be easily brushed off``
How easy has it been to brush YOU off? First you go from board to board demanding that I accept my religion as false now you are demanding that I accept my life is false. And why don`t you abuse me some more? chowk is the place to do it. You can be sure another Muslim man or dost-mittar will come and defend you. And you preach `empathy`, hypocrite.

And I am not a ``poor little hindu girl``, but I am certainly worried about the risks incurred by proselytizing groups. I have have had Christian friends all my life(including evangelists) and I can personally put these things in perspective - but thats not the case with many others. I personally have a hard time defending such practices as I described, because finally how can I make a case to other Hindus for respecting a particular group`s religious rights if that group doesnot respect theirs.

Thanks anyway for proving the last paragraph of my post #185 right.

sadna, ali87:
In Bangalore at least they accost you outside your home; here in Canada, they bug you even in your house. The safest way to get rid of them is to tell them that you are a muslim and they wont waste their time. This is probably what ali87 did:-).
Re. tableeghis, I have not read any report of them actively converting anyone in India. I think the hindu-to-muslim conversions in India are now largely through the marriage route.

tahmed32:
There are several reasons for the growth of islam, including those mentioned by you. Ostracisation is a big deterrent even among hindus, without that there might have been many more voluntary conversions, as was the case with the hindu-to-sikh conversions which were 100% voluntary in Panjab and which carried no threat of ostracisation. On the other hand, right or wrong, the hindu perception is that most of the conversions to islam from hinduism were the result of persecution. My own guess is that there were both voluntary and involuntary conversions but the magnitude of each is not known.
But I have no doubt about why muslims do not leave islam. While reading quran, even an agnostic like me began to worry the fate that awaits me in the afterlife. In an islamic society, as sadna points out, any muslim wanting to change his religion needs to get his head examined. In the west, too, the threat is not totally absent. The law might protect you but the family of the convert may not care for the law as is the case with honour killings, even when they have nothing to do with islam.
There is another difference between the ostracisation faced by a hindu and a muslim convert in India. A hindu convert may lose his family and friends but they will soon be replaced by a new group which will heartily embrace him or her. No such luck for any hypothetical muslim who may convert to hinudism; the poor convert will be shunned by both sides.
There is no denying the fact that islam is the fastest growing religion in America and that all conversions are voluntary. These conversions are mostly among the poor blacks and convicts who are converting to islam for the same reason that hindu dalits in India are converting to christianity, namely to rebel against the religion of their oppressors; in the case of dalits, that religion is hindu and in the case of blacks that religion is christianity.
But the qualitatively more significant conversions in America are from christians and jews to buddhism. These conversions are taking place at the high end of the society among people who are generally well educated and are quite successful in their lives. They are becoming buddhist not because they have been badly treated by the society but because they find the philosophy more attractive. Also, unlike islam, conversion to buddhism is not a one-way street and their conversion does not irrevocably commit them and their children and grandchildren to the new religion. Lately, however, I suspect that some of these nouveau buddhists are simply joining the bandwagon of the ``in religion``.

185 by sadna on June 14, 2003 11:46am PT

I already do sadna, I wear the hijab prescribed for males. Ie cover whole body with garments. You will typically not find muslim men going around in shorts. Muslim men are also covered fully from neck downwards. I even a couple of decades back many muslims regarded wearing thight jeans as not an acceptable wear especially for the prayers.

Looks like your sympathy for muslim women has vanished pretty fast.

your real intentions are here for every one to see. You shed false crocodile tears when ever you get a chance. Your pose yourself as a very reasonable person and then jump to make statements about women in islam with a standard canned paragaph that you have been using every time. However you steadfastly refuse to analyse what you are claiming. Your real intention is to keep hammering that Islam is not been good to women without any analaysis. Well except for some peverse satisfaction you will not achive much. It is unlikely to have any affect on any muslim. At the most you may be playing to the gallery of like minded hindus who hate muslims.
Perhaps you want to feel better by accusing muslims because you feel that they look down on your religon. You and your likes actually use these unsubsaintiated claims to justify your inherrent voilence against muslims.
Well I dont think that anything you do will have any affect on muslims nor will they feel that they can change your mind if they accknowledge your demands. For that is not what you are looking for. You are only looking for reasons to justify your hate.
You stand exposed and your cheap stratagies and thinking is there for every one to see.
Next time before you make any accusations on Islams treatment of women first try out the Hijab and then bother to post.

Another of your silly exaggerations about christians is now a story of the poor little hindu girl all reasonable while the wily prolythesiors are trying every trick in the book. I belong to Bangalore probably have lived there more than you have. I have never been bugged in the way you are exxagarting.
Yes I have had people attempting to talk to me. but they can be easily brushed off. Most of the times without any rancour by simply saying that you are not intrested. These christian prolythesiors are nothing compared to the Time share resort salesmen.
All the tearjerking stories about deciding to wear bindi or not are stories that only a delerious person like you can think people will belive in.
Muslims prolythesing in bangalore or in India is a joke. Except for the Tabliquis there is no group which prolethyies and even the tabliquis do it to mulsims ie those who they consider are not regular in their prayers etc. they have a tough time with muslims itself. They do go to villages where they try to revivie attandance in sparsely attended masjids and often Iliterate muslims who have very little knowledge of Islam except for a vauge Idea about paraying ocasionaly and partonisning graves of local seers.

and dont even start telling that because you are a girl they accost you this is joke apparently you have only visited bangalore once in a while. These christian groups work on the real poor people in the who live inhuts etc and that to never with accostion they suppourt them for months or years with money, charitiable activites and then include them in activities which seem to be secular but have a vauge chirstian content. Only when they feel that the people are open to them on a personal basis they start the real work. Of course there are people who give out pampleth invite you to gettogehers etc it is pretty easy sidestepping them by saying that you are not intrested or making vauge promises to look into the Idea.

Anyone wanting to become a nonMuslim in Pakistan will certainly need to have his head examined.

ali87#182
``like I said this kind of topic is a difficult topic to develve in form of discussion rarther it is suited for individual study with perionds of questioning etc. Nothing can be proved or disproved in this kind of forums.``
I agree.

ali87 #183
Please show some empathy and wear a hijab/burqa yourself.

dost-mittar #181
I read that statement in a book review where demagogues of both sides (nothing to choose between them!)are quoted from the 1990s:

http://www.indolink.com/Book/book27.html

To add to the point I was making earlier - I lived in Bangalore for a number of years, and during this time, I had the experience of repeatedly being accosted on the road, while walking or waiting for bus/auto. What would happen was a woman/girl who would approach smilingly and make polite conversation and then invite me to join some `friends` for `discussion and debate`.

When I refused, she would insist on telling me how I was missing out on something great, how I should just `try it` once, it would change my life, etc etc. These were members of a Christian proselytizing group - and they never took no for an answer, they never took 3-4 steady nos for answer. Even when I was laden down with shopping bags, they would not let me walk past, they would keep insisting for 5-10 minutes, as if I owed it to them to go to their meeting. Obviously I never went, and I kept refusing politely, always saying I was not interested or that I had no time, with only meant that they would then question me for personal details so that they could point out to me that I should be interested or judge for me whether I did have time or not.

I was never impolite, I never got into a discussion, I never got angry - these things didnot occur to me then. But it got so that involuntarily while getting ready in the morning I would calculate whether wearing a bindi or not wearing a bindi would decrease the chances of being thus accosted that day. If I wore a bindi perhaps they would understand I am happy in my religious identity as Hindu and leave me alone, or perhaps if I didnot wear a bindi perhaps they would think I am already a Christian and wouldnot accost me. (Neither device worked). In all the years in Bangalore, this happened not a few but many times, this was not just my experience but that of many others too.


The point of this is - IMO, those girls (and their Muslim counterparts) are making a BIG mistake. The tragedy of this situation (given that IMO disaster looms on us Indians) is that using their customary circular logic, both proselytizing groups are just too arrogant to give any weight to anything I say to them without heat and anger(much less that they are making a big mistake) precisely because I am a Hindu and they have NO value for what a Hindu tells them, esp without heat or anger.

dost mittar #180 Actually it is interesting to consider why hardly any muslim leaves the islamic fold, as you say, while hindus seem to have been doing it in droves (at least in past centuries). You think it is out of fear of social ostracization. But then: hindus converting to Islam were similarly ostracized in traditional society at least, I would think. (Happens within hinduism too - my brahmin friend told me his mother still refuses to talk to him because his wife is of some other caste). So, I dont think that social ostracization is an adequate explanation.

My own view is as follows: In past centuries, Islam did offer something positive to people: namely the chance to be seen as equal human beings. Indeed, in many places (e.g. in north africa in the first couple of centuries after muslim conquest) muslim rulers strongly DISCOURAGED conversion to Islam since this meant the converts would no longer pay jaziya tax. Nowadays, many of the conversions to Islam that take place are among US blacks. Clearly there is no fear of being put to the sword if they dont convert to Islam on the part of the American blacks. Clearly people like Malcolm X and other blacks saw this as a chance to be seen as equals (Malcolm X even wrote as much, I understand, when he said his experience on the hajj when he saw the concept of race become irrelevant as white and black skinned individuals stood shoulder to shoulder).

There were no doubt many people who converted simply to jump on to what we may call the Islamic Bandwagon as muslims became politically powerful over the last millenium. But clearly, as the Bandwagon steadily disappeared over the past three centuries, we would have seen individuals jumping off this Bandwagon. After all, what is to prevent me or any other pakistani living in the west from converting to christianity (for example)? Indeed, there could well be economic advantages for the poorer immigrants in converting and joining a church - e.g. free private schooling for kids in catholic schools (as latino immigrants often enjoy).

This brings me back to the point I was making: people living in urban settings (where social ostracization is not a big deal, given that social groups are not as strongly knit as in viallages) dont change religions for the same reason they dont change names: while possible, it is not worth the hassle. If one truly believes that all religions are basically saying the same thing (and this is what I understand from everything I have read and discussed), then conversion into or out of a religion really should not be such a big deal. While some white people convert (e.g. islam or to buddhism or to hinduism or between judaism and christianity), it is often for different reasons. As an illustration of this point: If you have seen the movie My Big Fat Greek Wedding, and seen how the traditional Greek family feels very strongly about having the wedding in the Greek Orthodox Church, while the WASP groom easily undergoes conversion by getting baptized as a Greek Orthodox and his parents have no problem with it all.

tahmed#178
``I differ here - I dont think changing religions is such a big deal.`` That is, I consider a religion to be like your name: you are given a name at birth, and so you are declared a muslim or hindu at birth. You can can change your name no doubt at any time in your life. And you can change your religion too.``
Change in religion ought not to be a big deal and it isn`t in countries like Japan and China, but it is a Very Big deal on the subcontinent. And I am talking here of what religions are in practice, not in ideal situations.
If you are a muslim and you leave Islam, you become a murteed and, as you are well aware, muslims don`t take kindly to blasphemists or murteeds. This is one of the reasons why a muslim will hardly ever leave the islamic fold.
Among hindus, there is no problem if you become a sikh, buddhist, kabirpanthi, jain, or start following a sufi peer ; the religion, indeed, lets you do that without leaving its fold. However, it is a different matter if you become a Muslim. It would mean, in most cases, complete ostracisation by your family and friends and will be a lifelong trauma for you. And as I said once earlier, change to Islam, in reality, means a complete transformation in one`s life which goes far beyond a mere change in faith.
In India, change in religion has always been a one-way street, from hinduism to other religions. Whatever the reasons for this one-way traffic, this has become a cause for concern among hindus. And if you want to know if this concern is legitimate or not, think of two names, Iqbal and Jinnah: Both of them had Hindu grandfathers and both ended up carving up our country and our province. As Jinnah famously said, the foundation of Pakistan was laid the day the first hindu converted to Islam.
So, religious conversion does mean more than a name change. If you are a hindu, it means that the rose becomes a thorn.

sadna#179
``I have for instance read a Muslim MP and member of Muslim Personal Law Board warning `history may repeat itself and Vajpayee may have to read the Kalima`.)``
Do you know the name of this MP? It is the failure of the muslims and other secularists to condemn such statements, which is providing the fuel for the hindu intolerance.

#177 by dost-mittar on June 13, 2003 7:14am PT

Well differnet verses have different requirements to understand them. For example a verse like
for example a verse which conveys the unity of god, a simple verse I must say.

112.001
YUSUFALI: Say: He is Allah, the One and Only;
PICKTHAL: Say: He is Allah, the One!
SHAKIR: Say: He, Allah, is One.

112.002
YUSUFALI: Allah, the Eternal, Absolute;
PICKTHAL: Allah, the eternally Besought of all!
SHAKIR: Allah is He on Whom all depend.

112.003
YUSUFALI: He begetteth not, nor is He begotten;
PICKTHAL: He begetteth not nor was begotten.
SHAKIR: He begets not, nor is He begotten.

112.004
YUSUFALI: And there is none like unto Him.
PICKTHAL: And there is none comparable
SHAKIR: And none is like Him.

each sentence is translated a little diffrently by established translators.

this verse is quite simple in it self It requries no background though there can be extensive discussion to suppourt each line it in itself complete. perhaps only comparision or back gorund could be the chrsistians view of trinity of one god. but even without it stands on its own.

on the other hand a verse like some of the controversial ones of killings of kafirs is to be read in context as common sense says that you cant kill kafirs indiscrimnately and certainly the in light of the treaties etc during the prophets time and other verses we see that the killing of kafirs was given in historical context and should be taken as such. Ie if similar conditions exist again.

The whole Quran was revealed in need for direction at both what we would call serious and even nonserious matters( mean to say non tricky situations, say like those about the saying truth, paying zakat, honoring pledges etc)
I can say that the Quran never claimed to be a book for dummies!! However the language was clear to the arabs(of that time)and the quran was not just word being relayed. It is application was practiced and explained by the Prophet.
The arabs were not illeterate neither was the Prophet(as claimed by some muslims too) ie though they could not write much they were quite elequoent people who took pride in their poetery etc. Even then the claim of Illiteracy was forwaded in context of the prophet not being a great poet or some thing like that.
like I said this kind of topic is a difficult topic to develve in form of discussion rarther it is suited for individual study with perionds of questioning etc. Nothing can be proved or disproved in this kind of forums.

#179 by sadna on June 13, 2003 6:01pm PT

1)Perhaps you have not read the various post (even in this discussion) where I have pointed that I dont have any problems with what you belive. Just take a look at the previous posts and check out the number of times I have said that.
Perhaps if you are honest you will do that and report the number of times I have done that.

...there is never any acknowledgement that a Hindu who disagrees with them on Hinduism could have a valid point. In fact in my experience on chowk, a Hindu who disagrees with a Muslim`s view of Hinduism is likely to be called intolerant and fanatic by the hypocrites here.

2)well another challenge here just this discussion.. there are many posts where me and tahamed have agreed with others. check them up and give us the numbers.

.....What I want to make clear is that an expectation that Hindus must disrespect/disown their religious heritage as the price for being called `tolerant Hindus` or as the necessary offering up to Islam or Indian nationalism/secularism is a very dangerous expectation which will only lead to horrendous conflict.

The whole object of my interacting with you in paritucular is to show this particular situation which occours with some hindus who are very happy to call themselves tolerant. Ie I want want to show you your contribution in the hindu-muslim issue.

Let us take the above statement. You are now stating the reasons for forthcoming ``horrendous conflict`` on basis of conclusions you have reached. In light of 1) and 2) will any person including yourself(a more calmer and refective) will be able to see that your conclusions are invalid and not based on facts but on what you misread in your anger(Which are based on your emotional state and sterotype images of muslims in your mind)

Similar reasons are given by the people who are under the influence of the sangh.

In the present case after a realtively cooling off period you responded to tahamed`s post to friend (where both were being rude to each other) tahamed post was directed at friend and made no mention of friends religon or toward women in general. His object was friend(distasteful as it was it was not a attack on any religion or people). You jumped into it taking offence at first on behalf of women. I found this a bit out of tack with yours and others who claimed that revelaing of womens body is not distasteful.

(My argument was that revelaing a women as a body where the sexual aspects are open for display will obviously lead to a person towards thinking sexually and this is my experience of all males wether religous or the famously over exposed americans or others all men will respond in similar fashion only the degree varies to some extent) Here this same argument is also made by artists , photographers etc. This is a false argument, In fact most interviews with most artistic models both of photography or art give the same results in any country or culture only difference being that the sexual thoughts and what may follow those are not considered differently in different cultures. So a american woman may not be upset if a man is sexually excited by seeing a nude art however some of our women do hold this quaint view that a man not get sexually affected upon seeing a woman naked. even gandhiji tried this experiment and surprisingly I have met many hindus in trains and other public places and on the internet who some how give the claim about their capability of not getting aroused on seeing a naked woman. In fact one such person told me that in a train in front of a girl who he was bugging and this girl had to ask me later on to either take that guy away or help her get a different place in the train.)

anyway you proceeded to attack tahamed in a sprited way and spoke of telling your mind if you came across tahamed in real life. I did find this situation a bit amusing ie not in the sexual content but in a image of a sprited and angry woman(probably less than 30) giving the works to an (self admitted)older tahamed who seems quite conservative(despite his present descriptive post) in terms of his views of womens sexuality.
I said It would be amusing to view it.

Your turning this spat into a muslim men vs hindu women issue was very contrived to say the least. You will notice that despite all your posts to tahamed in this issue he is yet to take your outbursts into account. If this does signifies muslim men mistreating hindu women then I dont think that you will find much suppourt from any rational observer.

However that is not the main issue with you. It looks like you have mens treatment of women close to your heart(which is even more aggravated if you belive a muslim man is responsible for it.)

You have pointed out countless number of times about the various problems of Islam with respect to the treatment of women and ask muslims to abandon that part of the faith totally. How come you take it on yourself to dictate to us what we are doing when you dont care for such instructions from muslims. Not only that you dont care to comment or analayse the arguments given by muslims that these are abberations by muslims not islam and that some that you consider valid and are still considered right by Muslims like the issue of Hijab are matter of perception.

On this matter of perception I offered a you a way to see if those are too oppressive or are as what many muslim wome who voluntarily take hijab say are true.

Many great and small personalities have the habit of expressing solidarity with the opressed or needy by voluntraily undergoing similar suffering to empthahise with those suffering and to experess soliddarity with them. Like gandhiji wearing only a dothi, others fasts or give themselvs up for arrest to express solidiraty with people who they considered as wrongfuly confined.
You could also do this symbolic empthay practice by taking on the hijab in some form for a few weeks (even dressing modestly and puting a scarf like some muslims will do)is what I ask you to try. Im sure beign a beliver in all ways being right it should not go against your religon to take up such a method of covering your hair and body(which in any case most indian women do, may be you too are like that).
Express your solidiraty with the muslim women for whom you show so much concern
and attempt to learn how much opprressed you feel with the hijab and if you feel any thing apart or along with the oppression then you owe it to yourself as well as those whom you your concern for to remember your experiences and post here those.


I hope you view your thirce mentioned reasons to grid up to fight muslims in light of all of the above. I belive you are a rational person normally but you have some stereotypes embedded in you mind that makes you jump at muslims form time to time.

I am not posting this to continue an unpleasant discussion with uncouth unpleasant people, I am posting this to make something clear.

Its one thing to have an opinion that Hinduism is all murder and sexual orgy and to express this opinion - everyone has a right to their opinions and a right to express them ad nauseum.

But I have observed/experienced(I could be wrong) that ali87(and earlier Farzana) have consistently displayed an expectation beyond this- that they have the right to expect that like them, Hindus must also disrespect the Hindu belief system.

I say this because both have on many occasions gone to considerable lengths to register their unqualified disrespect of everything to do with Hinduism and Hindus and there is never any acknowledgement that a Hindu who disagrees with them on Hinduism could have a valid point. In fact in my experience on chowk, a Hindu who disagrees with a Muslim`s view of Hinduism is likely to be called intolerant and fanatic by the hypocrites here.

What I want to make clear is that an expectation that Hindus must disrespect/disown their religious heritage as the price for being called `tolerant Hindus` or as the necessary offering up to Islam or Indian nationalism/secularism is a very dangerous expectation which will only lead to horrendous conflict.

(Such an expection does exist to whatever small extent- I have for instance read a Muslim MP and member of Muslim Personal Law Board warning `history may repeat itself and Vajpayee may have to read the Kalima`.)

I dislike the BJP intensely but I have never heard their leaders go so far and assert a similar proselytizing expectation that Muslims must give up their religion as condition for amity. Perhaps they do indeed imply this in their politics(given that their version of Hinduism seems to be hate speech and rape and murder of Muslims), in which case their expectation is as dangerous and unrealistic as any similar expection from any Muslims.

The sooner these unrealistic expectations on both sides are nipped in the bud, the safer it is for all of us.

My post is for this reason only - to make clear as a Hindu where the limits lie for me - that if Muslims, Indian or Pakistani think their famously perfect religion or Indian secularism grants them the right to expect universal submission to Islam, well get prepared to fight.

dost-mittar #177 ``Quran says repeatedly that Allah had sent this message for the Arabs in simple words in their own language so that illiterate Arabs can understand it. If so, there should be no need for interpretation. And I agree that the messages are quite clear and interpretations could merely be spin doctoring of one kind or another (whether by moderates or jihadis).``

Now you have a better understanding of Islam than most muslims. And a lot better understanding than virtually every single maulvi. And this is what I have been ranting about on chowk for ages - that there is no room for middlemen aka priests in Islam. It is for the individual to read and understand and apply it as his or she deems fit using his or her common sense.

``The people whose opinions I really value are those who have freely adopted a religion other than those of their birth after careful study and not because of some traumatic event such as marriage or socio-economic-political pressures. ``

I differ here - I dont think changing religions is such a big deal. That is, I consider a religion to be like your name: you are given a name at birth, and so you are declared a muslim or hindu at birth. You can can change your name no doubt at any time in your life. And you can change your religion too. BUT: a change in religion, like a change in name, is not worth the trouble. To paraphrase and extrapolate Shakespeare a bit:

``What`s in a name?
A rose by any other name would smell as sweet
Nor will a change in religion
Change thee by even a smidgen.``

So, call yourself a hindu or muslim or buddhist - no big deal. The important thing is WHO YOU ARE as an individual.

One advantage I do see is that I wont have to listen to one more Arab saying ``Mashaallah`` when you tell him your name as if you have found a cure for cancer or perhaps won the nobel prize for literature... like this palestinian-born electrician did last week with me and started going ``brother, brother`` when all I needed him to do was fix the damn heat pump.

ali87:
Good and let`s keep the discussion civilised.
I am one of those who believes that we defend our respective religions almost exclusively because of what can be roughly called our lifelong conditioning and upbringing or what the hindus more appropriately call sanskaras. In other words, if I were born a muslim and you a hindu, we would probably be saying different things. The people whose opinions I really value are those who have freely adopted a religion other than those of their birth after careful study and not because of some traumatic event such as marriage or socio-economic-political pressures. On Chowk, SameerJB is one such person who is a muslim by birth and buddhist by conviction. I too fall partially in that category since I also like buddhism and sikhism more than the religion of my birth, but in my case there is no significant incompatibility of these religions with my religion of birth.
Yes, I have read commentaries of the controversial passages in the quran. But I have several problems with that. It is said that Islam does not permit intermediaries and everyone has to do his or her own interpretation, suggesting that there is no definitive interpretation. Also, if these verses are to be seen in their context, it is inconsistent with the claim that the quran is valid for all times and all places (i.e., context free). It also supports those who claim that these ``revealations`` were too convenient - to provide divine support to the prophet whenever he faced serious situations, such as the accusations against Ayesha leading to the rule of evidence in `zina`, or the the prophet not liking people peering at his wives, leading to the dress code for women. But my main problem with these interpretations lies elsewhere. Quran says repeatedly that Allah had sent this message for the Arabs in simple words in their own language so that illiterate Arabs can understand it. If so, there should be no need for interpretation. And I agree that the messages are quite clear and interpretations could merely be spin doctoring of one kind or another (whether by moderates or jihadis).
And I agree we should spend more time on chowk on other issues. The Pakistanis seem to be doing that more about Pakistan than we do about India (I might say that I do try:-)).

#173 by dost-mittar on June 12, 2003 1:33pm PT

Well different people see different things in the same text. It is good that you read the Quran perhaps you did not read the commentary associated with the verses. The verses do not stand independent in themselves but at times there are conditional verses further qualifing the independent verses and also need to be seen in the context which they were revealed. I dont know if you have done such an exercise. There are plenty of instances which can be cited in history which suppourt what the muslims claim regd peacfullness of Quran and its recognition as such by muslims and on the other hand you will find plenty of times the same verses were used to justify unnecessary voilence(or as you will call the violence actually meant in the Koran).
A better plan would be to make a list of verses(they are not too many in number) that you find voilent and then do a futrther study of how they are understood by muslims.
However there is a possibility that you have already done all that and drawn your conclusions. That is your right.
But as a comprehensive text and compared to a collection of such texts and ideologies in other religions Islam does not suffer in comparision. So from the point of view of what is the Koran and its Ideology and how does it compare with other religons it will stand way above other such religious Ideologies. But that is my opinon obviously you dont belive that I can live with it. One may even give a reasoing that it should stand right on its own. Perhaps that is th right way to judge it.

My view is that all many of the things that Islam upholds is being adopted by the world today wether muslim or not. One may call it modernity but it is there in the Koran.
Basically I dont have much complaints with the non-muslim world it is increasingly comming to accepting the muslim view though it may call modernity. Both christianity and Hinduism have moved their positions closer than ever to Islam than any point in history.

Buddhisim had similar problems as all religons. Mahanayama Buddhisim (the type which is prevalent now in the world) which split the buddist religon was actually seen by the early buddhists as going against some of the basic tents of Buddhisim where preists, Idol worship etc were prohibited. However my knowledge is sketchy about buddhisim.
Commonly held belif in India that buddhisim is vegetarain is wrong Buddhists have no problem with either drink or meat as told by the Dalai Lama himself.

Me and you will always find some point where we can agree. However people like us getting to along is not a big thing. It is the hot heads that need to be reigned. My intention in spending time on this boards is to understand these peoples thinking process. It has given me valuable information to me. Also I feel that there is a need to know how to tackle the reasons for anger and to understand what are the possible processes in which one can penetrate the line of thinking with some logic.

After all even if we all become hindus or muslims our problems will not disappear. some new ones will crop up as pakistan is discovering. When two religons are present there will necessaryily be differences. I do not forsee India turning into another west ie of irreligousity and taking up what is called Modernity which I feel is just consumerism and little esle. So our solutions need to be different.
It would have been Ideal if we could discuss the real problems and solutions of our countries but such a situation at least on this kind of boards is not possible as the people dont have much intrest is dull booring subjects.

By the way some people feel that the problems are very large and cant be solved by individuals. I dont belive in this at all.

Those who so uneqivocaly defend US here fail to realise that the real reason for the success of US is the involvement of Individuals in its national building task. Even a small number of people can make a subustantial impact not by themselves of course but by taking increasingly more people along with their stand.

dost mittar #174 You are not in the bad books of this muslim, at least. :-)

On the literal acceptance of religious verses: You are right that the Zionist movement in the mid-19th century that culminated in the state of Israel was started by secular people. However, the basis for this was the literal acceptance of the Torah concerning the land of modern day Israel being promised by God to Abraham in return for doing his bidding. And indeed there had been a number of movements in the centuries before for the return of the Jews to what was then palestine: perhaps the best known is the 17th century movement led by the ``jewish messiah`` Sabbatai Zevi which lit a fire in jewish hearts all over europe, but had a surprise ending with Zevi being captured by the Ottoman rulers and becoming a muslim (he did not have much choice in the beginning, although later I think he seems to have gotten used to the idea), and still getting jewish visitors. This does not mean that the other reasons for Israel were not understandable: after all, jews had been routinely harassed by the europeans, and a major reason was the practical one of getting out of europe. Interestingly, the British PM (I forget his name) at the time strongly supported Zionism at the same time he voted against an immigration bill that would have allowed jews in central europe to seek asylum in UK. Such are the ways that men have used religion to serve political ends through the ages!!

Pakistan provides an interesting parallel to Israel, and someday I am sure someone will write a history PhD thesis on how religion was used (and also abused) for perfectly legitimate practical goals. The problem of course is that mixing religion with politics is a dangerous thing, as we all know too well nowadays.

tahmed:#170

Thanks for taking my rant in good spirit - as always.

It was not entirely directed towards you, just an expression of frustration at what sometimes goes on at Chowk. At times I feel personally responsible for the rabid hindu Indians :) and yes I know there are some here at Chowk. But I suppose that`s largely because we don`t have too many Indians at Chowk, so they perceive it as a `not Indian` site and utilize it to vent their own frustrations in the worst possible ways! But I claim that Chowk is neither Indian nor Pakistani -- just something good that both Indians and Pakistanis happen to share (among other things).

ali87: #168

Ali I think you are right, but I also think that many people need something to hold on to and religion fills this gap. We all need our beliefs, and it`s a fairly personal thing - but for some compulsion we feel the need to defend our belief and also convince others that our belief was chosen well - even before we can honestly say that to ourselves (before we reach the end of our journey we proclaim we have arrived!). Those who initially proposed the ideas in religions that are popular today- surely must have taken a journey of their own and realised something profound they wanted to share with others. I think in this sense - Buddhism is quite a cool `religion` where you have to discover the path, but like everyone else Buddhists too can get caught in rituals and superficial things. (I`m making an assumption here, I don`t know a lot about Buddhism). So I suppose we come back to the idea it is so, and it must be so - things will continue like this. And if it is a journey -- everyone will do it at their own pace right?


Brat

ali87:
I did not quote from the quran because I would merely be repeating what has been said on chowk before (I will repeat them if you insist though I would rather not!). I narrated that particular hadis because I do not recall it having been mentioned on chowk before.
Believe me ali87, I have read the whole quran, or rather its translation, and my views about Islam`s intolerance of non-muslims and support of violence did not change after reading the holy book. But I also know that the majority of muslims, especially Indian muslims, are quite tolerant and peaceful.

tahmed#163
Yes, there are are bible-thumping christians in the U.S and even in Canada but they do not determine the policy of their governments, nor do they say that the state laws should be based on the bible nor do they support training camps for killers or call them freedom fighters. The proportion of christians who support these groups is no larger than the proportion of muslims like yourself who accept the essential message of Islam rather than accept everything literally.
And the state of Israel was created by zionists many of whom were non-believers. The socialist Labour party of Ben Gurion ruled Israel for a long time. The premise was not so much religious as ethnic, of a group which had faced persecution historically on account of ethnicity.
As for hindus, unfortunately, they are becoming more intolerant than they were. But they have a LOT of catching-up to do before they get to the same level as the children of Abraham. There are many muslims like farzana and 12-head who can speak up their minds in India. Can you tell me of a single Hindu in Pakistan or any other Islamic country who can speak up their mind like that?
Regarding Chowk, you have been constantly claiming that the Indians are more intolerant. I wont make any comment on this as I do not claim to be neutral or unbiased. [If chowk conducts a poll on this, they will most likely find that Hindians think that Pakistanis are more narrow-minded and the Pakistanis the opposite; muslims think that hindus are more intolerant and hindus the opposite].
I have not commented upon the Interacts between you and friend because although I was somewhat surprised by your ali1-like post regarding friend`s mother, I know both of you are not above indulging in mutual insults. My comment was directed to sadna who may hold strong opinions but is civil in her discourse. I objected to her post as she had stereotyped all muslim men.
Since I am now in the bad books of hindus, muslims, indians and pakistanis, I must be doing something right!

Brat #164 I agree with you 100% that the term ``scum`` is not something that applies to all Indians. Or even to the vast majority of them, I may add. My views on Indians and other things are not so shallow as to be swayed by what one comes across on chowk (and in my post to dost mittar i do make it a point to refer to Indians on chowk only, not all Indians). I know many first rate Indians in real life, some of whom I very much like and respect. These were of course successful professionals and people in large companies, and obviously they are going to be a cut above SOME of the individuals who show up on chowk. I have Indian friends who by now qualify as lifelong friends (known them for a couple of decades).

I also agree 100% with your on what you write about religion. I have also argued along similar lines on chowk.

Chowk of course is different than real life in some ways. Aside from the obvious misuse of anonymity that some individuals make on chowk to abuse other posters, there is also a well-known psychological aspect to the internet that makes one`s words seem harsher than intended. To this we can add the fact that one meets people from a lot more diverse community on the internet than one does in real life. So, it is for this reason that we need not base our views on ALL Indians or ALL Pakistanis based on chowk interactions. Now all I need to do is to remember this good advice myself. :-)

Thanks for your post. I needed that on this board :-)

ali87 #166 Thanks for the good advice. As you can see in my post to ``friend`` below, I have taken your advice.

friend #167 and #162: So you are a liar: you have failed to meet the challenge in my post #159 to cut and paste what I wrote which provides you the basis of trying to portray me as flirting with another man on chowk .

Calling me names is not a response to that challenge. Nor does trying to back off now claiming that you simply said flirtation and did not word homosexual an answer. Nor is writing two such posts rather than one in response to my challenge an answer. zero plus zero is still zero. Duh!!

I wont be responding to your posts (unless I change my mind and think you deserve an answer). So, have a nice day.

Ali#166,
Tauheen-e-Ahmek is crying because I exposed his hidden desires.
This idiot converted ``ahmad`s flirting with RSaxena indicates that even old man in Pakistan try to keep learning fact of life by flirting with other boys. `` to ``homosexual flirtation``.
If he had even an iota of intelligence, he would have checked the meaning of ``flirting``
But Ahmek being an insult to all ahmeks, chose the meaning he was looking for.
His quick treatment is really necessary for the benefit for all Pakistanis. I will keep helping him.

Ahmek - Read following (if you know how to read)
flirt ( P ) Pronunciation Key (flûrt)
v. flirt·ed, flirt·ing, flirts
v. intr.
To make playfully romantic or sexual overtures.
To deal playfully, triflingly, or superficially with: flirt with danger.
To move abruptly or jerkily.
v. tr.
To toss or flip suddenly.
To move quickly.
n.
One given to flirting.
An abrupt jerking movement.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language

#164 by Brat on June 12, 2003 9:49am PT

Perhaps the solution is not to think our religion is ours. We being mere followers of gods religion It would be better if we focus to see how good we come compared to what our religion wants us to be.
After all a traveller cant say he is proud of the road. He may take pride in selecting the right road at the most. That to if he is successful in completing his journey as there are many detours available to get lost. Nothing can be claimed till we reach the goal by which time we would not be in a positon to do any talking with each other..:)

161 by dost-mittar on June 12, 2003 7:43am PT
but then you are talking about the Koran and quoting the hadis.. did you not notice that?
when you talk about the Koran you are not just refering to Koran I suspect You are referring to a range of systems ie Koran, Hadis, Sharia etc.

here your main worry I belive is in the laws of Islam ie Sharia. Now Sharia comes from the Koran and is not the Koran. Which is why till 1700AD(i think) the concept of validity Ijthiad was agreed upon. ie relationng what is in the koran to present day issues and problems. This hardly points to litrealism.
Then it was decided that there would be no more Ijthiad ie it was felt that world had come to a more or less stable postion and there cant be anymore reinterpration of the koran/ sharia as the world is not likely to change and all that was needed for muslims to deal with the world was already known.(a concept somewhat to similar to Francis Fukuyamas thesis of end of History a few years back). However it looks like the ulema was wrong things have indeed changed.
It is true that there is a big trend towards literalism among muslims who quote the koran in much the same way as its detractors do, usually to influence those who havent bothered to ponder upon the Koran much.
comparing Islam with christinaity,jews and hindus is essentially a non-starter.
when you see the scale of human endvaour and apply the teachings of Koran you will perhaps find that you come up with a handful of issues that you dont agree with. If you want to base your qualifications on Islam on this ration and compare it with chirstians, jews and Hindus you wont be doing justice to all concerned including yourself. But anyway It would be wise not to get into those as they can not be discussed without rancour and certainly this is not the place or method to do it. I would require a comparitve study of all the religons mentioned and should be done on a individual level and in some depth.

You too can be accused of literalism. Here article after article in this forum and post after post where many muslims take opposite positons on the debate about various aspects of Islam so where does your accusation of ``Muslims insist parrot-like that nothing in quran is irrelevant `` stand in that light. Or are you taking the liberty to decide who is muslim and who isnt?
In this very board itself many muslims have discussed how some Koranic verses are considered irrelevant in light of later verses in the Koran and of how one verse expains the other (ie not literal) or puts conditions on the other. So you can see how you yourself choose to ingore the evidence and take some Isolated statements literary.
There is no harm in muslims prasing the achivements of thousands of years ago all socities do that It is a problem when all they do is praise past achivements.
That Muslims recognise thier problems is visible in their statements in recent times is something you chose to ignore. Of course there is so far no action plan much less action on solving problems does not mean that they will not be solved. change never happens suddenly.

#163 by tahmed32 on June 12, 2003 9:29am PT

Let go of friend... I didnt think you will be so sensitive.

tahmed32:

In response to your concerns about all Indians being `scums` like the kind you have seen on Chowk -- no I don`t believe so. I don`t think anyone`s religion teaches them how to behave, or helps make their character -- anymore. Maybe in a different time this was true that a person`s religious beliefs made them the person they were -- I don`t think we can claim this any more.

Some people just love to be pests. What can you do? Other people, like myself don`t have too much to say about a specific issue so they stay silent. Does this mean that Chowk reflects the majority of Indians and Pakistanis? Perhaps. Perhaps the people who are quieter need to speak up. Perhaps there needs to be a greater representation of all sides and all opinions. Perhaps the same people who argue with each other on Chowk about silly issues and Hindus/Muslims would be the first to take arms.

But then there are all kinds of people right? Not all Hindus, not all Muslims, not all Christians, not all Malayalis (those who live in the middle-east will know this stereotype), not all Sikhs, not all hippies, not all alcoholics are alike - right?

Other than all of this stuff - on the issue about secular hindus here is what i think -- Hinduism according to me is a set of cultural beliefs, and no one can challenge me on that. As a Hindu I have the right to say this - but fanatics will make anything a `do or die` issue. Yes we have our share of insane people with hidden agendas on our side as well. Yes, there are Hindus who have in cold blood murdered other people just in the name or religion (or do we know what they murder them for?). Yes, like any other culture - Hindus have their share of bad customs, and prejudices.

Yes secretly each one of us believes that our culture, our religion, our identity, our intellect is in some way or another superior to that of the other persons. Will this change?

dost mittar #161 ``Jews, christians, hindus and others have gone on to ignore those aspects of their religions `` Not all jews and christians - There is a significant percentage of bible thumpers as percentage of the total population even in an advanced country like the US. The entire state of Isreal is based on the concept of the Promised Land (i.e. from the Torah which says that God promised Abraham the land of Eretz Yisrael - modern day Israel - in return for the prophet accepting doing God`s bidding). As for hindus, there is no single book like the Quran, so the entire issue is irrelevant.

I would be more sympathetic to this concept of the secular hindus etc. if I did not see for myself the narrow-mindedness that I have seen among too many hindu posters on chowk. I am convinced that the average pakistani (I dont care about muslims in general - there are too many of them for me to be concerned with) on chowk at least is definitely a more decent and open-minded individual than the scum you have in your community. And frankly I am disappointed that neither you nor Ajeet took ``friend`` to task for the filthy and lying accusations (I have post #159 below to him challenging him to back his accusations by cutting and pasting what I wrote and await his response) he made - but when I responded at his wave length (for reasons I already explained) - I immediately heard from you. Perhaps we have an unconscious ``cultural bias`` even among the most well meaning of Indian posters, n`ext pas??

Thauheen-e-Ahmek #159,
I am not a liar. Instead you are a disgrace-to-an-idiot. Otherwise you would have seen that whatever I have been doing is to help you.
I have only been bringing you to self realization. You yourself responded to my
``Tahmad`s flirting with RSaxena indicates that even old man in Pakistan try to keep learning fact of life by flirting with other boys. ``
by
``friend attacks me in the most vicious manner he could come up with: he had gone to great lengths to portray me as having a ``homosexual flirtation`` with this man

Your violent reaction to a simple remark indicates, and magnifies, your attempts to hide your inner tendencies. Otherwise you would have simply taken the remark as a ``joke`` similar to your ``jest`` with RSaxena.

Your tendencies have also been verified by ``chotta``, watchman in your area, who has been screwing you for years. Earlier he was doing it for your wife and mother but now he is quite sympathetic to your age and addiction and says that he will do it for free.

I am really a friend of your and want to slowly wean you away from these tendencies. Hence I have asked ``chotta`` to keep giving you your doses and if necessary get other young studs to satisfy your cravings.

ali87#160

Yes, Quran did provide for a contract for marriage which provided for a predetermined amount for the wife; like other elements of quran, it was an improved version of the jewish laws relating to women. But one can also quote verses from quran, as they have been quoted frequently enough on chowk, which are not that favourable to women. And according to a frequently quoted hadis, Prophet Mohammed visits Hell and finds that women far outnumber men there.

But the problem with Islam is not quran but to accept EVerythin in it as a literal Truth. Jews, christians, hindus and others have gone on to ignore those aspects of their religions or religious practices which are irrelevant today. Christians fought a reformation to get rid of their obscuranticism, made blasphemy irrelevant, accepted the emprical over the revealed scripture whenever scientific evidence pointed in that direction and went on to achieve unprecedented progress. Muslims insist parrot-like that nothing in quran is irrelevant and are therefore stuck in singing praises of their wonderful achievements a thousand years ago.

sadna

yet another lady opines on Islam

http://www.islamicity.com/articles/Articles.asp?ref=QN0304-1914

British Reporter who was captured by taliban later converted to Islam after her return(yes yes I know stocklhom syndrome.. )

..I wish I had this knowledge (and I`m still very much a novice) when I was captured by the Taliban because I would have asked them why they treated their own women so badly. The Quran makes it crystal clear that all Muslims, men and women are entirely equal in worth, spirituality and responsibility. Allah ordained equality and fairness for women in education and opportunity. Fair property law and divorce settlements were introduced for Muslim women 1400 years ago; maybe this is where Californian divorce lawyers got their inspiration from in recent years! The Quran could have been written yesterday for today...


If you wholy belive what someone else says to you here is an eye opener.

http://www.cambridgeclarion.org/ridley.html

DAILY EXPRESS
THE BEST AND MOST UP TO DATE COVERAGE

TUESDAY OCTOBER 9, 2001 35p

WORLD EXCLUSIVE: YVONNE RIDLEY`S FIRST INTERVIEW AFTER 10 DAYS IN THE HANDS OF THE EVIL AFGHAN REGIME
FREED FROM TALIBAN HELL
I lay terrified in my bed inside filthy, rat-infested prison cell
I went on hunger strike and fought with vicious guards
I risked death to keep secret diary for Express readers
FROM YVONNE RIDLEY
IN PESHAWAR, PAKISTAN

What she says about those headlines.

It seems Yvonne Ridley did not write these headlines, despite the use of the first person and despite the fact they appeared in her name. The following is what Yvonne Ridley herself said about the headlines in a BBC Radio 4 interview in ``The Choice`` produced by Liz Leonard broadcast on 27 October 2001.

BBC interviewer: in a way I`m not surprised uhm

Yvonne Ridley: no me neither

BBC interviewer: so you get back and in your paper under your name or at least probably the Daily Express rather than the Sunday Express, under your name from Yvonne Ridley in Peshawar er is this story I lay terrified in my bed inside a filthy rat-infested prison cell, risked death to keep a diary for Express readers, went on hunger strike and fought with vicious guards. Er where did that come from?

Yvonne Ridley: The imagination of er the headline writer because the copy bore no relation to the headlines.

BBC interviewer: They made it up?

Yvonne Ridley: Well someone did.

..........

Since we are trained not to question any thing the press says and the wonderfuly modern press you can see the mild comments for these lies.

However you dont need to take my word for anything. Looks like you have never interacted with muslim women in any great depth.

Take up my challenge and discover yourself if you were right or wrong.

She made her journey back to afghanistan with her daughter.

http://www.muslimuzbekistan.com/eng/ennews/2002/08/ennews27082002_2.html

she mentions in her interview..

* What are your views on women’s rights in Islam as compared to secular Western society?

- The first thing I scrutinized when I read the Qur’an was property and divorce laws. I was amazed. I thought it could have been written by a Hollywood divorce lawyer! In fact, that’s probably from where they got their inspiration. I was also pleased to see that women are equal with regards to education and spirituality, but the Qur’an does acknowledge we have the extra burdens of childbirth, breast-feeding and periods.

.....Moral of the story dont go to taliban to know about Islam go to the Koran.

friend: One more thing, my friend. You are a liar. If you wish to dispute this fact, please do so by cutting and pasting anything that I wrote in that exchange I had with rsaxena based on which you are trying to portray me as having ``homosexual flirtations``.

PS: I see you have written almost a dozen posts referring to me or directed to me. You will be pleased to learn that I diligently studied them (or at least did some high speed reading, and I did skip lines here and there) for any signs of intelligence. No luck.

sadna

The UK MP did not see any virgins here.. but you saw..

http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/comment/0,10551,975536,00.html
Israel can halt this now

Oona King in Gaza
Thursday June 12, 2003
The Guardian

· Oona King is Labour MP for Bethnal Green and Bow


..and they wait for a Palestinian state. They are no different from us: deny them human rights and they will respond with unacceptable terrorist violence.

That`s what Jews did when they set up the Stern Gang and blew up the King David Hotel in the 1940s. Ninety-four people died. The leader of that terrorist group, on Britain`s ``most wanted`` list, went on to be the Israeli prime minister. Many Jews revere him, even while they abhor the terrorism that ruins their lives today. Israelis must be freed from terrorism - such as yesterday`s horrific attack in Jersualem. All terrorism, not least Palestinian terrorism, is abhorrent. But it is also predictable..

#154 by sadna on June 11, 2003 6:02pm PT

there you go again....

you worry about the gujrats., delhi, Bhiwandis, srilankas, Harayanas ie the one does not need 72 virgins to kill. it is shame full to kill with not even a virgin to justify your killer lust.

Look ma No virgins here... yet hindus convinced the dalits to kill (how wily not even a single virgin promised)

http://outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodname=20030616&fname=Dalit+%28F%29&sid=1

``When they need us to kill the Muslims, they ask us to shout `Garv se kaho hum Hindu hain!` Once their dubious purpose is served, we are once again reminded that we are Dalits, the untouchables. Last month, five members of a Dalit family committed suicide at Rampir Tekra in Ahmedabad, compelled by starvation, but not a single saffron cap came to see their dead bodies. I will convert to Buddhism at the first opportunity.``
—Sanjay Parmar in Danilimda, Ahmedabad

``

#154 by sadna on June 11, 2003 6:02pm PT

Looks like you have a template of this ready to be used at any place any time.



...Millions have been killed for the sake of sex with 72 virgins, millions of women around the world have to cover themselves completely in black cloth so as not to be accused of obscene exposure, tens of thousands of women in one country were forced to leave their professions, their schools and colleges to protect `public morality` while members of their govt slept with prostitutes, many others live under threat of stoning to death while the members of their govt. booze and womanise in other countries, many donot have equal rights and often are not allowed to have legal identities independent of men.
...

here is the view of one among the millions who refutes your statement...

http://iviews.com/Articles/articles.asp?ref=NT0306-1996

Ms. Haque`s decision to cover herself, which she made in her freshman year, was nuanced and thoughtful.

``I noticed a big difference in the way guys talked,`` she said. ``They were afraid. I guess they had more respect. You walked down the street and you didn`t feel guys staring at you. You felt a lot more confident.`` Her parents were surprised but said it was her decision.


another says..

``The scarf draws the line,`` said Ms. Alhadi, the daughter of a Singaporean mother and Indonesian father. ``It`s already a shield. Without it everything comes to you and you have to fight it yourself.``

Not that there arent people who dont recognise the line or rod but however for the average man it does.

#154 by sadna on June 11, 2003 6:02pm PT

Say what let take up a challenge.

You cover yourself up(not necesserialy in burka, a chaddor, or even a muslim scarf will do) for a month and then see for yourselves if it makes any sense.

your repeating again and again same old arguments is not going to help. Ill stick to my stand. If you are honest give it a try!!

friend

Leaving aside everything else, its unhealthy for me personally to be among so many people who hold the world view that all of Hinduism is either murder or sexual orgy and for whom Hindu goddesses make the obscene abuse of Hindu women acceptable.

Millions have been killed for the sake of sex with 72 virgins, millions of women around the world have to cover themselves completely in black cloth so as not to be accused of obscene exposure, tens of thousands of women in one country were forced to leave their professions, their schools and colleges to protect `public morality` while members of their govt slept with prostitutes, many others live under threat of stoning to death while the members of their govt. booze and womanise in other countries, many donot have equal rights and often are not allowed to have legal identities independent of men.

But some people who belong to a perfect religion have no problem with all of that, but they have a problem with Parvati who is worshipped as mother of the universe, whom they insist is `filthy`.

The anger I feel is just not worth it. Whats the point of any discussion?

Aicha#152
Disgusted! Because I took Ahmed to task? That disappoints me. You were not disgusted with Ahmek`s glee when he was discussing his homosexual experiences, or when he was typing story of Chotta with my mother! You should have shown your disgust earlier to Ahmek or Ali. Would you have loved if I also cook a story about Ahmed, his mother and his daughter? But I am not like that old man and wont say that old man was once beaten by his own daughter for making a pass at her.

no not bored but DISGUSTED! So pls stop it!

Sadna#146,
Running away never solves anything. I don`t believe Dost is on anybody`s side. If you take my advise, continue your serious discussion with Dosts, sammers, saminas, nazars, firozs, harpreets and Anny of this site. There are plenty of them.

Other like urstruly, Tauheen, Ali and me can continue our mutual entertainment. You should not just scroll through the posts.

sadna:
It will be a pity if chowk lost you, one of its most articulate and logical posters...even greater pity if I were somehow responsible for it. Yes, other, less responsible, posters may have made derogatory remarks about other groups. As I said earlier, I intervened in this case only because of my higher expectations from you.

#146 by sadna on June 11, 2003 11:56am PT

Nobody is hounding you personally at least not me. Just your arguments are what are being debated.

It is sad that you consider Dost-mittar to be on opposite side as you. Neither am I and I think neither is tahamed.

I dont belive there were many women to startwith anyway I dont I recall any who have gone away because of this. I however have pointed many people to this forum both men as well as women to date none have liked the intense repetitive debates and have not bothered to go beyond a cursory look. So it is not as if only women dont like this it is men too dont like it.

Aicha#145 and other chowkies,
I am really sorry to have bored you. I was jesting with my old friend. And unfortunately this is only place I meet him.

It is not actually ``he said, she said``. It is ``he said, he said``..) I was just clarifying the misunderstanding between me and my old friend as listed by him in #132..

------------------
Ok, okey, a break ....

To tell you the truth Aicha, why I come and start all this is due to ``holier that thou`` attitude of my old friend. I am fine with posts of Urstruly and Ali as they do not make any pretensions of righteousness and do not cry foul when someone replies to them in their tone.
This gentleman is very gladly discussing pre-teen homosexual experiences of male population, is flirting (ok jesting) with RSaxena, and a one liner leads him to blow his top.
I am observing this person for a long time and he really needs my attention for his own good.

And I am really sorry if you find this boring. Please bear with me for some more time.

Alibaba #143,
Read your own posts
#118 by ali87 on June 10, 2003 10:42am PT
#113 by sadna on June 9, 2003 9:54pm PT

was some one talking about celebrationg sex some time back?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


#117 by ali87 on June 10, 2003 10:42am PT
#113 by sadna on June 9, 2003 9:54pm PT

that would be intresting though dont forget to call me I would love to wittness this clash

#142 by friend on June 11, 2003 10:53am PT

takes very little to keep you amused!!

friend - i think you have more than made your point so pls drop it. Pls dont start hesaid she sadi etc everyone here is beyond that.

dost-mittar #141
``But when one starts typecasting a whole group, like you did with muslim males, it`s a different story.``

Yes it is indeed a different story when its Muslim males - its OK if its Indian women. I am sure the poor defenceless Muslim men on chowk are grateful for your(and I have observed stuka`s) stalwart defence everytime they denigrate Indian women and someone replies to them.

We are on opposite sides - so be it - and our only hope is that soon I will get so disgusted that I will stop visiting chowk and there will be no cause for complaint. Perhaps you can get one of the alis or Urstruly to take care of that - these hazrats posts have already driven away most of the Indian women who used to interact here earlier.

tahmed32 #132
S..T..O..P P..R..E..S..S.
Oh dear, I, being a slow person, not as ``sharp`` and as ``decent`` as our Ahmek, need to add more.

Our old ``decent`` man writes


``a. a long-standing chowk poster (an indian, this being relevant to what happened next) and myself had an exchange of posts where he was getting the worst end of the exchange and cornered. no big deal - the exchanges were essentially in jest, with the posts consisting of two-three liners. ``


Dada Jaan, I quote from my post #92


``Tahmad`s flirting with RSaxena indicates that even old man in Pakistan try to keep learning fact of life by flirting with other boys. ``


Is it not a one liner? Baba ji, I was also only jesting!! You didn`t get my joke ..( I am so depressed.



b. out of the blue, friend attacks me in the most vicious manner he could come up with: he had gone to great lengths to portray me as having a ``homosexual flirtation`` with this man, ridiculed me on account of my age (and i plead guilty to being an older man, but then there is no shortage of people in their forties and even early fifties on chowk - this is not a teenagers` website by any means),


wow, great length!!!! ``tinke bhi lagte hain unko talwar jaise``, Our old man needs sensitivity training. His exchange with RSaxena was just a friendly chit chat. And my one line was

``AN ATTACK IN MOST VICIOUS MANNER .. GOING TO GREAT LENGTHS``

ahem..


and his usual ridiculing of my name (ahmek).



Oh! now I realize his pain. He is touchy about being called Ahmek. Perhpas everyone called him by this name during his childhood. I will now call him ... drum rolls .. tada

Tauheen - e - Ahmek

So, baba ji, did you like this funny post. Do write suggestions for improvements.

#140 by friend on June 11, 2003 9:45am PT

... I also know that you were only joking when you suggested a possible sex between old ahmek and Sadna.

and where did I suggest that?

Just as because you sleep with your wife does not mean that you will do the same with your mother by the same logic one does not like hear the sexual experiences of your female relatives.

Looks like sex is on your mind. Here I was not refering to sexual experiences per se but the their experineces with males ie in case of girls (at least that is what the poupular view is)that takes the form of curshes on handsome(or imagined to be) teachers etc. which need not necessarily be sexual in content.

sadna:
I don`t mind anyone saying things like evil, regressive, backward, etc. about either Hinduism or Islam. These are just ideologies, even though very dear to some of us. But when one starts typecasting a whole group, like you did with muslim males, it`s a different story. Yes, others do it too but Chowk has not appointed me a referee or a censor. I appealed to you only because I have higher expectations from you.
Regards.

Ahmek #132
Wow again! Old guy is finally at the cliff. About to fall.

As it is my duty to help him, I will keep helping him.

Ahmek mian, you must realize that I have no personal motive here. You tell me (or any other chowkie can reply too), whatever you were writing to Saxena - was that not flirting? He was not even on this board when you wrote his name. Ok.. okey... I know you were only joking. But, than old man, assume that I was also joking. If you don`t agree with that premise, than, is joking only your birth right?

Ahmek, you believe in blunt talk. But you do not show a skin thick enough to hear back any blunt talk. You talk about cornering other people. What is your reponse on getting cornered? Displaying your manhood by talking about my mother. You can keep talking. I grew on streets and have dealt with paper tigers like you all the time. I am capable of returning each and every ounce of garbage thrown by you with interest.

As far as ``punch`` is concerned, I will remind you again that other also know how to punch and I do not want to see you searching for your remaining teeth.

And talk of chowk moderators, why should you set the bar? Why not bar be a little higher than you can reach? Only because I have potential to reach any level?

Baba ji, kindly keep your sainthood in your pocket and don`t try to impress others. Everyone knows that you are a drooling old sex starved man.

And check that I could have responded to you by dragging your mother in this discussion, or saying that your father died when he found that you were really fathered by ``chotta``, but I will not do so ..)

As I wrote to Ali87 earlier, I believe in kindness even to dogs. You are still a human being. Though an old senile one. You must get better treatment.

ali87 #136

``well im not surprised by your response. Im sure that my female relatives are human beings with full range of capabilities. ``

Bhai alibaba, I am not saying that your female relatives are not human beings with full range of capabilities. I also know that you were only joking when you suggested a possible sex between old ahmek and Sadna.
But you yourself wanted to read about sexual experiences of other females. I am very timid guy and can never ask this question to a female. You are such a brave person. Therefore sir, I just requested that you very kindly ask the sexual experience from females in your family and enlighten and oblige us. Thanking you sir and your faithfully etcetera etcetera.

#134 by sadna on June 11, 2003 8:25am PT


...What justifies ali87 dragging my religion into this?

Why dont you check some of your own posts and s see if you have been taking your own advice?

Like I said earlier the filth part was Tenaliramas contribution justifying gujrat with potrayal of what he called Filth ie the paintings of Sarswati by MFH.

regardign all the comments I have made earlier they are a put in prespective (in a manner similar to what you and some other hindus do regd Islam) your glossing over of some of the practices which are considered bad by many hindus themselves(Im not intrested in judging wether they are right or wrong)

Your glossing over of realities of hinduism while commenting on Islam I what i want to foucs on. I usually dont badmouth any religon just your presentation of the religon.
If you want to potray treatment of muslim women by muslims or by Islam in whatever color you want then I would like to put it in prespective with that of Hindureligion. Of course there are many things wrong with muslim socitey but your discussions seem to take place in Isolation ie apart from hindu socitey. There is no harm in you pointing out such problems with muslims I welcome them but if you want to denigrate religion for it, I want to put it in prespective in the same exagagerated manner that you do.
So bottom line is this if you are going to make sweepign and broad condemmations then you will force me to adopt the same. However you as well as I know that the truth lies somewhere in between. If you are ready to adopt a moderate approach Im willing too.

#131 by friend on June 11, 2003 7:56am PT

well im not surprised by your response. Im sure that my female relatives are human beings with full range of capabilities.
They are Im sure subject to similar (if not exact) experiences in life as men.

#130 by dost-mittar on June 11, 2003 7:56am PT

I hope you will ignore some of the points im rasing. They are not meant to convey my views but just to question somebody elses. Not directed at you or others.

dost-mittar
What justifies ali87 dragging my religion into this? Please check my reply - I asked him this too BEFORE I said it. Moreover he says what he and other Muslims say about Hindus/Hindu women should be acceptable to me because Hindus ` worship Gods who rape others`, we ` burn women we donot like` `we worship filth when we worship Sh