Gujarat, Madrasas and Other Things

#278 by Honorable_Syed on June 10, 2003 10:42am PT

++Let me first start off with what Islam says:
``O mankind! We have created you from a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know one another. Verily, the most honourable of you with Allaah is that (believer) who has al-taqwa [i.e., is one of the muttaqoon or pious]. Verily, Allaah is All-Knowing, All-Aware”
[al-Hujuraat 49:13] ++

Nothing very special about the fact that God is all knowing and that we should be pious. All religions say that

++The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “O people! Verily your Lord is One and your father [Adam] is one. An Arab is no better than a non-Arab, and a non-Arab is no better than an Arab; a red man is no better than a black man and a black man is no better than a red man – except if it is in terms of taqwa (piety)…” (Reported by Imaam Ahmad, 22391; al-Silsilat al-Saheeh, 2700). ++

Do Arabs treat you pakis well?? Think about it. They don’t even think that Paki Muslims are true Muslims. This itself is discrimination on the basis of nation (if not class and caste)

You Pakis very much believe in color discrimination…you are extremely obsessed with your fair skin/handsome looks and you really look down upon anyone who is darker in skin shade even if he/she has more qualities that you.
So what is so great about some book quoting ‘a red man is no better than a black man’..when in reality, you pakis feel u are superior to Indians on the basis of skin colour, even though most of you had Hindu ancestors…


++This is what is prescribed in Islam. Now as to the situation in the subcontinent. Due to the heavy influence of Hinduism in the subcontinent, the Muslims have created a societal hierarchy, where certain people are venerated due to their ancestry.++

On the one hand you totally disown any links you ever had with Hinduism by saying that Islam tells its followers to start afresh and totally forget your past. And you totally ridicule all Hindu rituals-obsolete or current ones..SO WHY THE HELL DO YOU HAVE THIS INFLUENCE OF HINDUISM??? Wasn’t it this very ‘societal hierarchy’ that you disliked when you converted to Islam?

++In the subcontinent we have also distinguished people based upon their ancestry, i.e. the Ashrafs (i.e. Syeds, Pathans, Shaikhs, etc..) and the non ashrafs, but this practise was institutionalized by the British, who divided the Muslims into two classes, and this is evident in their records. But let me emphasize, spiritually they are equal, unlike Hinduism the concept of untouchability does not exist, even after all the corruption Hinduism has brought to our religion.++

Mahashai…of all the chowk muslims…you are the one who has been constantly bragging about your Syed ancestory. You have superiority complex and look down upon teh `converted muslims` of the subcontiment. So you believe in class/caste system.

And in Pakistan-a totally Islamic state, there is hardly any influence of Hinduism. But you guys have more of feudal and class consciousness.
I read a book ‘Saat Aasman’ by Asgar Wajahat…it describes how the upper class muslims, always discriminated against the lower caste & class…how they had a wife just as a child-bearing keepsake and other so many lower caste(mostly hindu) women as `rakhails`..and these rakhails had kids who were not treated equally…
So, where is the concept of equality????? I am sure the generations illegitimate kids are very much hanging around in India/Pak. And most of them now say ’I come from a Syed khaandan’. Why do they feel ashamed to say that they have lower caste blood in their veins, if as per you..Islam doesn’t discriminate??? Why so scared???

You blame it on others…Only other religions are bad as per you. Islam is perfect. Anything bad in Islam is due to bad influence of others. Heights of arrogance….

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

``I`d like to hear your comments on the class/caste(?) distinctions observed by Muslims of our subcontinent. Now what would you attribute these to``
Let me first start off with what Islam says:
``O mankind! We have created you from a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know one another. Verily, the most honourable of you with Allaah is that (believer) who has al-taqwa [i.e., is one of the muttaqoon or pious]. Verily, Allaah is All-Knowing, All-Aware”
[al-Hujuraat 49:13]

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “O people! Verily your Lord is One and your father [Adam] is one. An Arab is no better than a non-Arab, and a non-Arab is no better than an Arab; a red man is no better than a black man and a black man is no better than a red man – except if it is in terms of taqwa (piety)…” (Reported by Imaam Ahmad, 22391; al-Silsilat al-Saheeh, 2700).
This is what is prescribed in Islam. Now as to the situation in the subcontinent. Due to the heavy influence of Hinduism in the subcontinent, the Muslims have created a societal heirarcy, where certain people are venerated due to their ancestory. In the subcontinent we have also distinguished people based upon their ancestory, i.e. the Ashrafs (i.e. Syeds, Pathans, Shaikhs, etc..) and the non ashrafs, but this practise was institutionalized by the British, who divided the Muslims into two classes, and this is evident in their records. But let me emphasize, spiritually they are equal, unlike hinduism the concept of untouchability does not exist, even after all the corruption hinduism has brought to our religion.

Studebaker: HAHA!! sO YOU ARE ADMITTING YOU ARE A jAMADAR??

#264 by ali87 on June 9, 2003 10:41am PT
#242 by m_souza on June 7, 2003 10:52pm PT

Islam has no problem with the marriage. Aishya did not have any problem with the marriage. Her father was the one who suggested the marriage. Neither did the socitey see any thing bad wit the marriage. Aishya grew up to love the prophet and had a very respectable and happy life. So what exactly are you cribbing about?
Just because some one defined that 18 years is the age of marriage does not mean that any thing else is wrong.
---------------------

Ali87…suppose..just suppose…That you have a 9 year old daughter. Now, again suppose that I have a son aged 45(not that I have and neither can have).
Now, my son wants to marry your daughter. Do you mean to say that you will agree to this marriage?? And do you think such an alliance is appropriate just because your daughter had no objection to it??
Your daughter may not have objection to it because she is too young to know what is happening. And even if she has an objection, then you would be there to convince her, isn’t it?? And the society would also not see anything wrong in this marriage and you would be a happy father.

You believe in Islam. So for you, everything that is written in your book is law and beyond sin. So a marriage between a 45 year old man (that too a supposedly ‘perfect’ man, God’s last messenger) and a 9 year old child is valid and acceptable. But why do you think the rest of the world should not call it a sin.
And that too when muslims have all the time been rebuking Hinduism so much, claiming that only Islam is the only true relgion. Why do you expect hindus to spare your religion if you are out to insult us.
Otherwise, honestly…at least I don’t care what you believe in..what age your daughter marries an elderly man..or what age your ‘true religion’ thinks is appropriate..

Only thing that I have just started HATING so much is the arrogance..the superior attitude shown by Muslims at chowk..the likes of Honerable_syed and to some extent by all of you..especially the Indian muslims who have no respect for the major religion of their country… which only reflects their dislike for Bharat. No amount of hatred towards Hinduism can change the fact that India was and is a hindu majority land. Its native religion for centuries has been Hinduism, one of the world’s oldest religion, a fact to be proud of…

I listen to the talkback radio and TV shows in Australia all the time..they are so very anti-muslim…they just abuse and maek fun of Islam on the radio and the muslims can’t do anything about it…Do you get such treatment in India??(ingeneral, I am not talking abt the riot thing..riots were wrong but so was train-burning)

But Hindus ..I feel ..just because of their previous non-violent set of beliefs, in the past ware taken over by muslims..and till now..it is the muslims who can so openly insult the native religion of India. But if Hindus say anything…then ..’we suffering minorities… we suffering muslims’..thing starts and all blame is on hindus

Indian muslims will have to learn to respect Hinduism in order to get what they want..
The writer Zarine is a good example..I just hope there are more like her..

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

In resp to urbashi
Actually, i thought you were referencing my post 243, on the article i posted on the origins of the urdu speaking muslims, which is a historical account by historians. Anyways, i also suggest you look up the enyclopedia on the bahmani kingdoms in the deccan, which should clarify the concept of afaqi and dakhni to you. As to the origins of Urdu, no doubt it has been influenced by hindi, but they certainly are not the same when you look at the linguistics and not the colloquial. You will find heavy influence of persian and arabic in urdu, whereas although these words have crept into the hindi language, they are considered foreign words, atleast to the linguists. Examples are arabic words like hawa, khalas (not kalas), khatm, zubah, etc.. I ask you whether these words are hindi or urdu? Please lets be sincere to all of us, and to yourself first.

In resp to #272
``Remember that a North Indian (e.g.. UPite, Bihari, MP) Muslim has far more in common with people from other religions of his own region than with South Indian Muslims. Certainly a Bengali Hindu feels that a Bengali Muslim is his own kin much more than a Rajasthani or a Tamilian could ever be. Culturally in India we`re all the same people, and we celebrate our plurality.``
This is again where you are wrong. Muslims from even far off places like the mindano, have far more in common with us than you people, the reason being the concept of Ummah, which the hindus can not accept, because it alienates them, this is a fact which sincere people will not deny. The most important bond shared by all muslims is their religion, hence given a choice if a muslim had to marry his daughter, i ask you would a bengali muslim marry his/her daughter to a bengali hindu, or would he/she prefer a flipino muslim? This is a question which i pose to you. Another point i would like to emphasize on the matter of the muslims in deccan, if you study your history, you would come to realize, that many muslims of foreign descent have left the deccans after the military occupation by the indian army. And there is plenty of historical evidence to back this up. A lot of them left for either pakistan, the middle east or north america, hence this community might not be as vibrant as in the past. Also i would like you to research about the several thousands of yemeni muslims from hadhramut that had migrated to the deccans during the time of the nizams. Are you saying that these muslims are of the dravidian stock? It seems like the hindus get a kick by constantly ranting about these ``so called`` conversions. It seems like the hindus are so ashamed of their religion and culture that they constantly want to drag the muslims into this. And concerning your statement `` No-one in India is superior to anyone else. We sink or swim together. And the most important thing is that we have the freedom to think for ourselves``. You are living in some fantasy world my friend. What the indians are facing right now is a conflict with their hindu religion and the rights of the majority of indians, the dalits. Again there is no denying that the hindu religion advocates this hate filled segregation.

Honorable (?)_Syed,
I`m letting you see what you`d written in your post #160, so that before you try to justify yourself try to remember what you`d actually said:

The hindus should sort out these problems before coming here and telling the Pakistanis who their ancestors were, which is quite ludicrous, to be honest with you. And by the same token, we should ask all hindus to convert to Bhuddism, as thats what their ancestors were. Another thing i would like to ask the hindus is why do most Muslims from the Deccan areas have lighter skin if they converted from hinduism. If they were converts then they should have dark skin like the other south indians.

So you might have meant to say something else, but landed up writing the above.

And once again, I reiterate that the vast majority of Muslims in India, whether from the north or the south, whether Urdu-speaking or Telegu/Tamil/Bengali/Gujarati/whatever-speaking, are the descendants of converts. Any apparent difference in the colour of their skins (apparent, that is, only to the South Asian, not to Caucasians or other whites, as you should have realized if you live in a predominantly white society/country, for whom there`s absolutely no difference!) - unless they come from aristocracy (what we call raisi backgrounds, who again form a minuscule percentage of Muslims, like it or not! Lack of acquaintance with the reality of India does make the rabid Pakistani go in for weird statements based completely on wish-fulfilment) - is primarily due to the class of people who had converted. And do try to get your facts and figures right when you write about majorities and minorities, ok? Don`t just imagine up things to prove whatever point you`re trying to make.
Urdu, remember, is an Indian language. I know that`s difficult for the Pakistani mind to accept, but read history - not the doctored ones prescribed in your schools, of course, and not the Indian versions, because you won`t accept them, but at least the ones by Western scholars (your mindset is clearly the legacy of colonialism). Just as there are more Muslims in India than there are in Pakistan, there are more Urdu-speaking Indians (Hindus, Muslims, Christians) that you have in Pakistan. It is one of the innumerable wonderful products of the great syncretic civilization we`re so proud of here. And it`s alive and thriving. Even many so-called mainstream ``Hindi`` films are really Urdu ones. So the overwhelming majority (I depend on census statistics, not on imagination) of Urdu-speaking Muslims, who, mind you, apart from the Hyderabadi arsitocrats, are basically North Indians, are the descendants of converts.

I`d like to hear your comments on the class/caste(?) distinctions observed by Muslims of our subcontinent. Now what would you attribute these to?

Remember that a North Indian (e.g.. UPite, Bihari, MP) Muslim has far more in common with people from other religions of his own region than with South Indian Muslims. Certainly a Bengali Hindu feels that a Bengali Muslim is his own kin much more than a Rajasthani or a Tamilian could ever be. Culturally in India we`re all the same people, and we celebrate our plurality. We don`t pretend to belong to the families of aristocrats of a far-off place and time, who had once invaded our country in search of loot (which they tried to disguise under the cloak of a religious mission) just to help us believe we`re superior. No-one in India is superior to anyone else. We sink or swim together. And the most important thing is that we have the freedom to think for ourselves.

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

#267 by pmishra2 on June 9, 2003 12:11pm PT

as for painting people naked (divine or not) i feel that this is not a unrestricted freedom much depends on the socitey. If hindus did belive in not potraying their gods or goddess naked it would be certainly offensive on part of MFH to do that.

However it doesnt seem that that was the intention of MFH he was only reflecting reality that to he highly admires such representation.

Same goes for beef eating. If it offends others and is an easy thing for one to avoid then it is better for others to do so. In fact this is what that has been practiced for a long time in India. However things are changing in shops which serve beef hindus constitute about half the clientele much to the charging of the poor muslim because such rise in demand has raised prices by more than 50% in the last few years.

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

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

#266 ali87

Please read my post carefully before picking me up in your thread. I was not addressing you or Tenalirama. I was addressing only those silly people who say foolish things about shiv ling, naked goddesses etc. All this while belonging to traditions that have equivalent most peculiar sets of beliefs!!!!

As far as M. F. Husain goes, he has every right to paint himself or Saraswathi or who-ever naked. However, people also have the right to protest peacefully if they feel offended by his expression.

#244 by nb on June 8, 2003 8:09am PT


#241 by pmishra2 on June 7, 2003 7:19pm PT

#240 by bbabu on June 7, 2003 4:06pm PT

#239 by sadna on June 7, 2003 2:20pm PT

.......And exactly what is wrong with a goddess having a naked figure?

That is for you to decide, not my decision.

However you are getting angry at the wrong person.

the filth suggestion(to justify Gujrat) was not given by me(I only made a intresting comparison) but by Tenalirama.

in one post he says..

...MF Hussain(muslim) could shamelessly draw a naked saraswathi(Hindu Goddess) and yet get away...

and in response to my post which essentaily said what you all above have admitted (and given justifications)that Hindu goddesses are shown naked many times in temples

Tenalirama says..

..It always come to this, Hindus should take anything thrown at them and not fight back. While Muslims can get away with any anti Hindu filth



The posts for your reference are here ...


#221 by tenaliramanna on June 6, 2003 3:35pm PT
#212 by ali87 on June 6, 2003 10:41am PT

What temple structures are you talking about ? Goddess Saraswathi is never shown naked. I can understand if you are talking about the ``Shakti`` goddesses (Kali, Chandi & others). Despite the voluptuous structural forms that a Sculpture makes (mostly with clohtes) on, Sarswathi is worshipped fully covered. (I`m yet to see a temple where it is otherwise).

Living in a society with diff religious groups, one has to be sensitive others too. Let MFH draw a naked prophet, then we can take this discussion to the next stage.

It always come to this, Hindus should take anything thrown at them and not fight back. While Muslims can get away with any anti Hindu filth. Why ? You can only push so much and then another Gujarat will happen - something that you and I will have to sit and regret.

He can draw a naked goddess and do pooja in his house everyday, but you bring it out - you are playing with emotions of millions. Worse, if they are from another religion !!!

Hope you understood.



#205 by tenaliramanna on June 6, 2003 7:18am PT


If you are a hindu....you must have a serious inferiority complex. MF Hussain(muslim) could shamelessly draw a naked saraswathi(Hindu Goddess) and yet get away.............understand that the violent hinduism is happening only as a result of rigid Islam which has always been a pain to mainstream India.

#242 by m_souza on June 7, 2003 10:52pm PT

Islam has no problem with the marriage. Aishya did not have any problem with the marriage. Her father was the one who suggested the marriage. Neither did the socitey see any thing bad wit the marriage. Aishya grew up to love the prophet and had a very respectable and happy life. So what exactly are you cribbing about?
Just because some one defined that 18 years is the age of marriage does not mean that any thing else is wrong.