A Challenge to My Co-religionists

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

hisexcellency:

i agree that fundamentalists are not responsible for the current crisis. pakis on this site are simply displaying their class bias when they criticize fundamentalist while ignoring damage done by elites that are mistakenly perceived to be secular by awam. the number of people killed by fundamentalists is tiny compared to lives that could have been saved had the elites instead of stealing from the national kitty, used national resources to provide basic necessities like clean drinking, an efficient healthcare system etc.

moral bankruptcy displayed by elites however does not justify course of action adapted by groups such as jamaat islami and the shia clerics in iran. leaders of these groups are simply exploiting genuine grievances of awam to establish their hold on power. to pretend that these groups are acting to bring democracy is to ignore history. jamaat had no qualms about being in bed with zia and jamaat eagerly accepted isi`s cash to fund their electoral campaigns. and iranians clerics even lockup other clerics who happen to disagree with them. it is extremely important for people who want to see genuine change in muslim societies to adapt a strategy that enables them to confront without alienating the awam, the threat posed by hard line religious groups. otherwise their fate will be no different from the fate of moderate elements that played a critical role in bringing about the russian or the iranian revolution.

Excellency Sahib,

No, I`m sorry, but violence as the only answer does not cut it. We HAVE a choice and no excuse making, rationalization, finger pointing, etc. is going to magically absolve us from it.

WE are tired of cleaning up your messes. WE are tired of trying to protect your rights when all you and your ilk do the next minute is run back out with more nonsense. WE would like to coexist peacefully in the world with Palestine, Israel, Kashmir, Pakistan, India, and falana and dimka as well. WE know that YOUR way has made things worse.

Your peeps have problems with progressives, liberals, and non Muslims? Lets see y`all access legal services, alt. media, NGOS, coalition groups globally without us...please-by all means-see what you can get accomplished.

In the meantime, try to conduct yourselves with some intellectual and spritual dignity, okay?

HisExcellency #various
I was not speaking of US and Israel here, I was speaking of India and Pakistan.

``Nobody is blaming every non-Muslim or every Muslim for this problem. The common Pakistani has no clash of civilizations with the common Indian. ``

Well, if not common Indians, are you saying its the Indian government which is responsible for embezzlement of funds and corruption by members of the Pakistani army, bureacracy and politicians, or is the Indian government responsible for the influence of feudals, or the proliferation of madrassas or the blasphemy law? Is the Indian government supposed to write Pakistan`s constitution, formulate policy, balance the budget, impose land reforms, hold fair elections and run law and order in Pakistan? You can`t be serious.

``Could Hosni Mubarik, General Ayub Khan, Zia-ul-Haq and Pervez Musharraf survive as rulers of Egypt/Pakistan without American assistance. ``

They wouldnot have, but there have always been groups in Pakistan which have courted the interference of the West.

And I remember very well, when Musharraf first took over and the West shunned him, there were endless arguments presented both on chowk and in the Pakistani English press about how the West is trying to impose alien concepts like Westminister democracy on the population of Pakistan which is not ready for democracy. Literacy rates and poverty rates were copiously quoted to show how the democratic process was unworkable in Pakistan and the US and the Commonwealth are way off in not accepting the awam`s support of the coup.


Now that Musharraf is legitimised by the West, thats a problem too?

I am not saying what the US has done/is doing is right. But even now, the typical argument made even by the celebrated `liberal` Najam Sethi is, if the US and international institutions donot prop up Musharraf, the fundos will take over. There are orchestrated rallies to show just how precarious is Musharraf`s position.

Apparently, responsibility of resisting fundamentalists in Pakistan is the US`s or India`s, who must pay off Ivy League educated Pakistani elite who very profitably bemoan their victimhood, justify the extremism and point out how the real problem is how much the US and India fall short of their own ideals.

This arguement of Islamic fundamentalism as a reaction to the corruption and ineptness of secular elite is phony. Islamists origin goes way back. There were Islamists even in the courts of Tughlaqs, Sadat, Lodhis and Mughals. The Islamists gain power in the last 50 years due to coldwar politics of being fiercely anti-socialist. They were actually backed by Saudis with the approval of US. Three rganizations, Jamaat-e-Islami, Nahdat-ul-Ulema in Indonesia and Ikhwan-ul-Muslimoon in Arab world were backed by Saudis and USA.

In Pakistan, Maudoodi and JI were active against Qadyanis and family planning as back as early fifties of last century. I was part of JI during late seventies and early eighties and have firsthand knowledge of their stand and agenda. They as well as other deobandi, barelvi and later wahabi organizations all made past, particularly early Muslims as model for Muslim society. The JI believed in amir-ul-momineen, bait-ul-maal, zakat and pan-Islamism in international trade and politics. Rest of the Islamists were even less sophistcated than JI cadre. It was/ is Islam, obeying and pleasing God and avoiding disobeying God in their own interpretation that has been determining their agenda and actions. The corruption, hypocrisy and failure of secular elite has helped them in improving their support in masses to some extent. Hamidm is right on money in most of his posts. One single world that describes islamic fundamentalism best is retrogressive vis-a-vis modern world and open society. The open society or liberal society is the biggest oxymoron from their perspective.

The failure of secular elite in power has hurt Pakistan internally but Islamic fundamentalism even without in power hurts both domestically and internationally. Its effects in power are devastating because their sole objective is to defeat - to defeat unislamic enemies, unislmaic moral values, unislamic banking system, unislamic penal code, unislamic international trade, unislamic education, unislamic freedom of thought, unislamic emancipation of women, unislamic entertainment and so on. The obsession with defeating is self defeating and nothing more. It ends up laying waste to whatever standing in already under pressure civil societies.

The acceptance of Islam was a matter of convenience for us to begin with. We had distinct cultures and part of a local civilization. It has done just one good thing in its 1000 year existance in subcontinant and that is diluting or eliminating caste system. It defeated caste system and not the deep philosophical thoughts of subcontinent now known as Hindusim. It was the weakness of caste system alngwith matters of convenience under Islamic invaders rule and not some stupidly believed strength of Islam in all matters of life. That is where Islam limitations for us Panjabis, Sindhis, Balochis, Mohajirs and Pashtun begin and end. Rest is hogwash. The essence of Islam and later Sikhism is casteless society and start and stop concentrating at that one point. Why should we throw away millenia of cultural and philosophical heritage just because one stupid caste system. Should we throw away the military because of Musharraf or Zia? Should we get rid of procreation because some children end up nothing but trouble? No, we should not throw away what is ours including what we define as deep philosophical thoughts of Indian civilization. That is our heritage.

Reply His Excellency #83

``It is very convenient & hypocritical for non-Muslims and Muslim liberals to blame Islamic fundamentalists and radicals for the terrorism and a likely clash of civilizations. What have the non-Muslims done to address the general feelings of discontent and powerlessness in the Muslim world??``

Mian, what have Muslims (of any stripe) done to address not the general FEELINGS but the CAUSES of discontent and powerlessness in the Muslim world?

To be honest, most Muslims are oppressed by other Muslims (the poor by the rich, the veiled gender by the unveiled...). Pretending otherwise is letting ourselves off the hook - if Palestinians gained independence tomorrow wouldn`t most of the ummah remain in the sorry state it is today?

So ask yourself, why is it that people prefer to talk and think about Palestine instead of equal rights for Muslim women?

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

Re: ZafarA`s 110 post

Not only would ``we`` rather talk about Palestine and Kashmir than equity between Muslim genders, but when the occasion of the two dovetailing-i.e. forced burqa`ing in Kashmir to support Islamic Kashmiri secession ideology, the conversation breaks down to non response or denial. This is completely intentional, and for once, I`d like a straightfoward response on why Kashmiri Muslim woman who do NOT want to wear hijab as a symbolic act of fundo protest are being forced to with punishment of acid attack. Where in the Q`uran is this written? And where in the Q`uran is it written that debate of female equity is the intellectual domain of male Muslims?

SameerJB:
``It was/ is Islam, obeying and pleasing God and avoiding disobeying God in their own interpretation...``
Since I am reading the Quran (its Urdu tarjuma, actually) these days, I would beg to modify ``obeying God`` into ``obeying God and his Rasool``. And since, you MUST accept what he said as He said, in effect it means obeying the Rasool only. That is why, I think that Mohammedan was not an inaccurate word for muslims. Or is it just a Kaafiraana logic? [If it is, Allah bahut mehrabaan aur reham valla hai aur sab jaanata hai!]
``It has done just one good thing in its 1000 year existance in subcontinant and that is diluting or eliminating caste system``
I beg to differ once again. About the only thing that muslims in India did not reject after conversion was the caste system. Even today, the word ChoorHa in Pakistan connotes a much greater hatred and contempt than the words like Mehtrani, jamadarni, scheduled caste, harijan etc. used by the Indians these days for the same people.

dost-mittar:

I agree with you about allah and rasool instead of just allah but if you read wahabism, the current mutant ninja, stress on rasool is reduced in favor of allah. Wahabis do accept invoking ``ya allah`` but do not accept ya Mohammad.

Regarding dilution of caste system, I believe that it has been, in fact diluted or weakened among Muslims despite Musalli and chooRa terms you described. Most people do not know or care about caste identity in cities. It is economic class system. A lower caste based political party in Pakistan would win handful of votes as compared to BSP in northern India.

Among Pakistani Panjabis, despite majority Jatt population, the pride in Jatness is much lower than Sikh Jats as one notices in discussions on various Panjabi websites and number of songs, associations and matrimonial ads in Indian newpaper outrightly seeking particular caste or identity. You can pick out matrimonial ads from Muslims and see the clear difference. Pakistanis did make few movies with jat word. A very large number of Pakistanis do not write or do not contain caste as their last name what is so common in India. Since very few Brahmins converted, the concept of uppermost caste does not exist. The khatri converts (who do not belong to major castes of Panjab but successful in education and business) are least likely to display any casteism. It exists at village level but its influence is self-contained within that local environment and actually beneficial in identifying in the weak or negligible identification with nation, provinvince and religion.


Actually last election under Musharraf was the first time when Jat caste was openly used in Panjab to gain potential candidates and support for Chaudhries of Gujrat and their backers in government. The concept of lower caste among Mohajirs is almost non-exixtant except few people who consider themselves ``aslaf`` from the pure line of Mohammed but no political or economic power.

Calling somebody lower caste wins no support in Pakistan polity from any upper or middle caste politicians. Actually this has not been even an issue. The musallis, RangaRs and chooRha are a tiny minority and unfortunately people have kept them at the lowest level.

Zafar #101
``powerlessness in the Muslim world``

I suspect your definition of powerlessness or that of those actually living in the Muslim world may be different from HisExcellency`s.

I would imagine that expats in the US often hear their local priest talk of the inevitability of `Islam ki fateh`. Then they come out of the sermon and face the stark reality and walking back to their MBs to return to their million dollar homes, they are overcome with this feeling of powerlessness.

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

``Why you just quoted what we read in post #101 as #110...Without adding any thing of your own????? ``


Dilshad, please READ post 101, then READ post 107, COMPARE then, then THINK, then comment (if you have something to say) without badthameezi.

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

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

Reply Dilshad #111

``Bhaijan read 110 then read 107 then read 101 then read 111 ..but bhaijan just as 107 was not there before i posted 108 can you let me borrow your psychic ability...``

lol - got me!

But heading back to your original:

``Why you just quoted what we read in post #101 as #110...``

It`s called fuzzy logic...110 was typed, when 110 had not yet been posted...what could the explanation be...typing mistake in which 1 and 0 were switched...was 101 meant?....sounds right...checks, when you compare referred to author of post (moi)...fine...not worth mentioning, let`s stick to the substantive. Wokay? (You coulda done that re: posts 105 and 107 too, given what you had responded to, khair...) Just pointing out because it might be useful in future.

``Without adding any thing of your own????? ``

This is where really reading the two posts comes in. Saminashah had added, very cogently, to my point by saying (and which I had NOT said):

``Not only would ``we`` rather talk about Palestine and Kashmir than equity between Muslim genders, but when the occasion of the two dovetailing-i.e. forced burqa`ing in Kashmir to support Islamic Kashmiri secession ideology, the conversation breaks down to non response or denial. This is completely intentional, and for once, I`d like a straightfoward response on why Kashmiri Muslim woman who do NOT want to wear hijab as a symbolic act of fundo protest are being forced to with punishment of acid attack. Where in the Q`uran is this written? And where in the Q`uran is it written that debate of female equity is the intellectual domain of male Muslims?``

Which seem like good questions to me. I don`t see anybody giving her a straightforward response, either.

Vaisai, I would find psychic powers pretty useful...just saw X-Men Return (or II?) and enjoyed it.

Regards