The Barbarians Within The Gates!
Feroz R Khan April 1, 2005
#220 Posted by malikjahanzeb on April 4, 2005 8:37:48 pm
kaalchakra and SR:
SR sahib, your optimism is very soothing but I have many reasons to be pessimistic about the situation. Let me state them and then you can tell me if you still see any way out for sufi islam.
Every idealogy has to have certain goals and motivations for their spread and defence. Sufi Islam has no real identity of it`s own and is just a substandard version of the real islam. If we compare the two, sufi islam (though tolerant and spirtual) is like a younger brother to wahabi (brutal and intolerant) islam. And like all good younger brothers, sufi islam has to vacate the seat so that the elder brother can sit (he is only comming now to claim his seat).
Sufi islam is only there as a pretext for wahabi islam. last time when arabs invaded, they injected a certain doze of wahabism. this time, they are behind strenthenning it more and the effect is going to be cumulative.
Sufi islam is in no way at odds with real islam. It is just an inferior (as per muslim mentality) version which will give way to wahabism whenever the later seeks it. Take Ishfaq Ahmad. he tried to articulate sufism but his work turned out to be a mess of intellectual confusion. on the contrary, wahabi islam emerges from the very pure sources of quran, history, hadees, to the point interpretation of them, land of the pure etc. Sufi islam is obviously at a moral disadvantage, and hence has no motivation for it`s sustainance.
I ask you a quesiton. Every such big social activity is supported by some natural factors which arise from within poeple from their very needs. Who do you think is going to sponsor the effort to keep desi islam?
government? they can`t even help the poor eat well, how they can carry out something more prfound?
educated people? they have the trend to free themselves from this religous business at all.
followers of desi islam? they are already losing and have every reason to keep losing untill wahabi islam takes it`s place.
my friend, i also want to see desi islam to prosper more than anybody but the thing is, your optimism is not real. the only way muslims will value moderation when they will get their butts kicked big time under islam for no less than a century or two. this system is going to see a rise, before it collapses and gets erases and becomes history.
kaalchakra,
i rate you higher in terms of your realism. desi islam has no chance.
mj
SR sahib, your optimism is very soothing but I have many reasons to be pessimistic about the situation. Let me state them and then you can tell me if you still see any way out for sufi islam.
Every idealogy has to have certain goals and motivations for their spread and defence. Sufi Islam has no real identity of it`s own and is just a substandard version of the real islam. If we compare the two, sufi islam (though tolerant and spirtual) is like a younger brother to wahabi (brutal and intolerant) islam. And like all good younger brothers, sufi islam has to vacate the seat so that the elder brother can sit (he is only comming now to claim his seat).
Sufi islam is only there as a pretext for wahabi islam. last time when arabs invaded, they injected a certain doze of wahabism. this time, they are behind strenthenning it more and the effect is going to be cumulative.
Sufi islam is in no way at odds with real islam. It is just an inferior (as per muslim mentality) version which will give way to wahabism whenever the later seeks it. Take Ishfaq Ahmad. he tried to articulate sufism but his work turned out to be a mess of intellectual confusion. on the contrary, wahabi islam emerges from the very pure sources of quran, history, hadees, to the point interpretation of them, land of the pure etc. Sufi islam is obviously at a moral disadvantage, and hence has no motivation for it`s sustainance.
I ask you a quesiton. Every such big social activity is supported by some natural factors which arise from within poeple from their very needs. Who do you think is going to sponsor the effort to keep desi islam?
government? they can`t even help the poor eat well, how they can carry out something more prfound?
educated people? they have the trend to free themselves from this religous business at all.
followers of desi islam? they are already losing and have every reason to keep losing untill wahabi islam takes it`s place.
my friend, i also want to see desi islam to prosper more than anybody but the thing is, your optimism is not real. the only way muslims will value moderation when they will get their butts kicked big time under islam for no less than a century or two. this system is going to see a rise, before it collapses and gets erases and becomes history.
kaalchakra,
i rate you higher in terms of your realism. desi islam has no chance.
mj
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#219 Posted by echoboom on April 4, 2005 8:20:30 pm
for a complete read:
http://valleyadvocate.com/gbase/News/content?oid=oid:105706
These people don`t ``love life,`` they hate the freedoms the rest of us so blithely took for granted before George W. Bush was inserted by the Supreme Court in the nation`s rectum as a compassionate conservative suppository.
Which should send a collective shudder down the spine of all who are growing more nauseated by the day with the Republican Party and the right-wing extremists in whose grip it has fallen. If the GOP continues to pander to this insane agenda, we may all hereafter be denied the freedom to grieve for our loved ones in peace.
But that`s a small price to pay for promoting the ``culture of death,`` just as the loss of our civil liberties was a small price to pay for security.
How can one even respond to such criminal stupidity? It`s like trying to argue with someone whose only rebuttal is, ``Why do you hate America?``
............
My rebuttal, then, is this: It depends on what you mean by ``death.``
· 32,000 Americans are killed each year by guns, including 10 more last week in a Columbine-style and Hitler-inspired rampage in Minnesota.
· 3,487 Americans currently await execution; the U.S. is the only Western democracy that uses the death penalty, and is third behind China and Congo in numbers executed.
· The United States dominates the international arms market, selling 2.5 times more weapons ($150 billion annually) than the second- and third- highest arms merchants combined.
· Bechtel, which has in the past hired GOP stalwarts Caspar Weinberger, George Schultz and William Casey, supplied most of the weaponry held by Saddam Hussein. Today those weapons are used to kill American troops.
· Carlyle Group invests in weapons systems and military hardware. On and for some time after 9/11, members of the Bush family (including G.W. Bush`s dad) and Osama bin Laden`s family owned controlling interests in Carlyle.
· Lockheed Martin is the largest weapons manufacturer in the world. Its head lobbyist is former RNC chairman Haley Barbour.
· One in every two casualties of war are civilians caught in the crossfire.
As I said, it depends on what you mean by ``death.``
http://valleyadvocate.com/gbase/News/content?oid=oid:105706
These people don`t ``love life,`` they hate the freedoms the rest of us so blithely took for granted before George W. Bush was inserted by the Supreme Court in the nation`s rectum as a compassionate conservative suppository.
Which should send a collective shudder down the spine of all who are growing more nauseated by the day with the Republican Party and the right-wing extremists in whose grip it has fallen. If the GOP continues to pander to this insane agenda, we may all hereafter be denied the freedom to grieve for our loved ones in peace.
But that`s a small price to pay for promoting the ``culture of death,`` just as the loss of our civil liberties was a small price to pay for security.
How can one even respond to such criminal stupidity? It`s like trying to argue with someone whose only rebuttal is, ``Why do you hate America?``
............
My rebuttal, then, is this: It depends on what you mean by ``death.``
· 32,000 Americans are killed each year by guns, including 10 more last week in a Columbine-style and Hitler-inspired rampage in Minnesota.
· 3,487 Americans currently await execution; the U.S. is the only Western democracy that uses the death penalty, and is third behind China and Congo in numbers executed.
· The United States dominates the international arms market, selling 2.5 times more weapons ($150 billion annually) than the second- and third- highest arms merchants combined.
· Bechtel, which has in the past hired GOP stalwarts Caspar Weinberger, George Schultz and William Casey, supplied most of the weaponry held by Saddam Hussein. Today those weapons are used to kill American troops.
· Carlyle Group invests in weapons systems and military hardware. On and for some time after 9/11, members of the Bush family (including G.W. Bush`s dad) and Osama bin Laden`s family owned controlling interests in Carlyle.
· Lockheed Martin is the largest weapons manufacturer in the world. Its head lobbyist is former RNC chairman Haley Barbour.
· One in every two casualties of war are civilians caught in the crossfire.
As I said, it depends on what you mean by ``death.``
#218 Posted by echoboom on April 4, 2005 8:08:43 pm
EVERYBODY -l-//-o//v//-e/-s/- HATES AMERICA
do not miss the intro. to the author at the bottom of the page.
The kuttaas brought up in cantonement kennels continue to smell & savour the dogfarts of their Masters: Never ever will they utter a word of criticism. Their entire hate is reserved for the muslims. It is the uniformed kuttaas & the un-civil servants [afeesUr claass] which
is taking Pakistan spiralling down the Dunkin-Donut hole.
``The Ugly Americans cannot be Michael-Jacksoned. ..Time to remove the tubes``
The Silence of the Lambs ( Ba Ba Blacksheep)--a..maizing! NOT!
Hate Down Under
April 5, 2005
by Bob Newman
Citizens of the former penal colony of Australia made it exceptionally
clear last night that the hate-America-syndrome has turned into
contagion down under.
I was a guest via satellite on SBS’ “Insight,” of
which Australians have little when it comes to the war on terror. The
topic was interrogations and torture.
Throughout
the hour-long show, one bright, shining lie shone through: the
audience, whom I presume are representative of most Australians,
believe Americans are the evil aggressor in the war on terror and
America in general consists of psychotic sadists whose favorite pastime
is kidnapping innocent civilians so that all manner of Papillion-style torture can be visited upon them.
Some examples of how Australians think:
What appeared most lost upon the audience and some of the other invited
guests was that nearly every one of them lives entirely in the
theoretical and philosophical world. They’ve never seen a terrorist up
close and personal or had a friend or family member killed by
terrorists, nor are they likely to. Still, in their lazy arrogance and
from the comfort of their living rooms, Australian liberals, like
American liberals, see not the terrorists as the enemy, but those who
are willing to fight them.
And were the show to
have been watched by terrorists when it aired, they would have nodded
and smiled like gargoyles with every vile, hate-filled word from the
audience.
Given this, the only apparent hope for
Australia is Prime Minister John Howard, who has the daunting task of
somehow preventing his people from again being slaughtered by
terrorists as they were in Bali, while they themselves loathe those who
would lay down their lives to protect them.
Bob Newman
Bob
Newman, a decorated, retired US Marine, is host of the “Gunny Bob Show”
on Newsradio 850 KOA in Denver, and host of “Inhuman Newman’s
Anger-Management Hour” on 630 KHOW, also in Denver. His “Global
Positioning Statement,” a daily insider’s update on the war on terror,
is carried by various Clear Channel radio stations from coast to coast.
A ground-combat veteran, he is the director of international security
& counterterrorism services for The GeoScope Group and is the
military science & terrorism columnist for The Denver Daily News.
He can be reached at bobnewman@clearchannel.com.
do not miss the intro. to the author at the bottom of the page.
The kuttaas brought up in cantonement kennels continue to smell & savour the dogfarts of their Masters: Never ever will they utter a word of criticism. Their entire hate is reserved for the muslims. It is the uniformed kuttaas & the un-civil servants [afeesUr claass] which
is taking Pakistan spiralling down the Dunkin-Donut hole.
``The Ugly Americans cannot be Michael-Jacksoned. ..Time to remove the tubes``
The Silence of the Lambs ( Ba Ba Blacksheep)--a..maizing! NOT!
Hate Down Under
April 5, 2005
by Bob Newman
Citizens of the former penal colony of Australia made it exceptionally
clear last night that the hate-America-syndrome has turned into
contagion down under.
I was a guest via satellite on SBS’ “Insight,” of
which Australians have little when it comes to the war on terror. The
topic was interrogations and torture.
Throughout
the hour-long show, one bright, shining lie shone through: the
audience, whom I presume are representative of most Australians,
believe Americans are the evil aggressor in the war on terror and
America in general consists of psychotic sadists whose favorite pastime
is kidnapping innocent civilians so that all manner of Papillion-style torture can be visited upon them.
Some examples of how Australians think:
An audience member somewhere around 60 bitterly complained that America
had killed 100,000 civilians in Iraq. He didn’t cite a source or offer
any evidence of this ridiculous claim, and I was the only one to
challenge him (when I did, the audience fell silent and slack-jawed,
stunned that an American would dare question an Australian). Yet he and
his fellow Aussie sheep believe that, somehow and with no evidence
(such as 100,000 new graves in Iraq filled with the victims of these
imaginary American attacks) to support his ludicrous claim, the
American military killed five times the number of German civilians
killed in the bombing of Dresden on 14 and 15 February 1945.
An audience member stated that the American military was going around
Iraq kidnapping innocent civilians and torturing them. She gave no
reason why Americans would do such a thing. No audience member
challenged her, nor did the show host.- Another
audience member said Americans were torturing people out of revenge for
9-11; a pedantic and remarkably ignorant accusation that, again, went
unchallenged by anyone in the audience. The host was also unwilling to
challenge the claim. - When an admitted
terrorist with the East Timor resistance was introduced as a guest who
had been allegedly tortured by the Indonesian army, the audience
cheered him. Whereas it is true that both the resistance and Indonesian
army committed atrocities in the war there, not a single Australian in
the audience mentioned that Australia was the only country to recognize
the brutal annexation by Indonesia of East Timor after the July 1976
invasion. By Australia’s supporting the invasion, the Indonesian
annexation was given credence and legitimacy by the Australians, which
encouraged the government of Indonesia to massacre even more East
Timorese. It was totally lost upon the audience that their nation
supported the gruesome suppression of a people, whereas America’s
liberation of Iraq freed a people. - When
various members of the audience complained that America had invaded
Iraq with false intelligence about weapons of mass destruction, thus
rendering the invasion illegal, not a soul in the audience noted aloud
that Saddam had slaughtered one million people during his reign; I was
the lone voice who pointed this out. Again, shocked silence in the
audience that this audacious Yank would have the unmitigated audacity
to speak the truth and question the audience’s self-proclaimed interest
in the well-being of Iraqis.
What appeared most lost upon the audience and some of the other invited
guests was that nearly every one of them lives entirely in the
theoretical and philosophical world. They’ve never seen a terrorist up
close and personal or had a friend or family member killed by
terrorists, nor are they likely to. Still, in their lazy arrogance and
from the comfort of their living rooms, Australian liberals, like
American liberals, see not the terrorists as the enemy, but those who
are willing to fight them.
And were the show to
have been watched by terrorists when it aired, they would have nodded
and smiled like gargoyles with every vile, hate-filled word from the
audience.
Given this, the only apparent hope for
Australia is Prime Minister John Howard, who has the daunting task of
somehow preventing his people from again being slaughtered by
terrorists as they were in Bali, while they themselves loathe those who
would lay down their lives to protect them.
Bob Newman
Bob
Newman, a decorated, retired US Marine, is host of the “Gunny Bob Show”
on Newsradio 850 KOA in Denver, and host of “Inhuman Newman’s
Anger-Management Hour” on 630 KHOW, also in Denver. His “Global
Positioning Statement,” a daily insider’s update on the war on terror,
is carried by various Clear Channel radio stations from coast to coast.
A ground-combat veteran, he is the director of international security
& counterterrorism services for The GeoScope Group and is the
military science & terrorism columnist for The Denver Daily News.
He can be reached at bobnewman@clearchannel.com.
#217 Posted by malik99 on April 4, 2005 7:48:48 pm
SR # 204 writes ``As a former SURKHA I can claim that I have not paid a single penny worth of income tax on form 1040 to Uncle Sam since before the first Gulf War of 1991... and now having moved to the other side of the Atlantic I no longer pay even state sales tax or property tax. ``
NOT SO FAST!!!!! Wait a second! Why have you reduced the supporting of United States of America to merely payment of taxes???? Aren`t there other ways YOU are helping or benefiting from USA, despite you being a SURKHA??
Think about it. Even though you have moved to the other side of the Atlantic, YOUR security for the last 55+ years has been paid by NONE other than Uncle Sam!!! You have been able to enjoy the tranquility and the peace and the luxury, without having to worry about defense spending. Uncle Sam has been bearing that cost for you so you can rest easy.
But thats not it!!! Wait, there is more. US has a HUGE current account deficit europe, meaning, US imports more from europe than it exports to europe. This MEGA trade relation between US and Europe has afforded folks like you to find it finanically suitable to live in Europe. You even use US products everyday, and thus adding to the coffers of US companies, who, thanks to revenue generated by folks like you, pay MEGA taxes to US government.
If you are REALLY true to your words, you would move to a place where there is no direct positive economic influence from USA. And strangely enough, there are 3 countries that I can think of which come in that category: Iran, Cuba and North Korea.
Unless you are a resident of one of these 3 countries, please stop narrowing your taunts to mere payment of taxes! Thanks!!
BTW - I enjoy your FOMC-Minutes ilog thing - even though they seem to be predicting for a while that ``sky is falling``.
NOT SO FAST!!!!! Wait a second! Why have you reduced the supporting of United States of America to merely payment of taxes???? Aren`t there other ways YOU are helping or benefiting from USA, despite you being a SURKHA??
Think about it. Even though you have moved to the other side of the Atlantic, YOUR security for the last 55+ years has been paid by NONE other than Uncle Sam!!! You have been able to enjoy the tranquility and the peace and the luxury, without having to worry about defense spending. Uncle Sam has been bearing that cost for you so you can rest easy.
But thats not it!!! Wait, there is more. US has a HUGE current account deficit europe, meaning, US imports more from europe than it exports to europe. This MEGA trade relation between US and Europe has afforded folks like you to find it finanically suitable to live in Europe. You even use US products everyday, and thus adding to the coffers of US companies, who, thanks to revenue generated by folks like you, pay MEGA taxes to US government.
If you are REALLY true to your words, you would move to a place where there is no direct positive economic influence from USA. And strangely enough, there are 3 countries that I can think of which come in that category: Iran, Cuba and North Korea.
Unless you are a resident of one of these 3 countries, please stop narrowing your taunts to mere payment of taxes! Thanks!!
BTW - I enjoy your FOMC-Minutes ilog thing - even though they seem to be predicting for a while that ``sky is falling``.
#216 Posted by nazarhayatkhan on April 4, 2005 7:34:21 pm
Anil # 205
I understand. No single authority. No single book. And no single set of belief. There was no need for Court to define Hinduism and artificially confine its scope, contrary to very spirit of Dharma.
Thanks.
nhk
#215 Posted by echoboom on April 4, 2005 7:09:13 pm
The jaahil, who takes pride in knowing & flaunting German, does not know, in fact is proud of being an illiterate & ignorant of even Urdu--let alone arabi, or farsi.
The Barbarians are not certainly not happy with such a scenario. They want to know why Pakistan has such illiterates on its payroll.
HarronEllahis of Pakistan are looking into it.
The Barbarians are not certainly not happy with such a scenario. They want to know why Pakistan has such illiterates on its payroll.
HarronEllahis of Pakistan are looking into it.
#214 Posted by KaalChakra on April 4, 2005 6:58:50 pm
tahmad32
Learning about Pakistani people has been a very humbling and an eye-opening experience. In every way they are most friendly and most civilized, and best possible (potential) friends Indians can hope for.
I sometimes talk to extremists on our side. I can honestly say that the worst things Pakistanis say on Chowk can often be better than what I hear from some of my Indian friends. Not a fair comparison, but at least it does indicate some things.
I am drawn to playing a small-time ijtehadi, if you will. IMO, all ideas must be continuously brought together to clash against and crash into each other, so that all poeple - not hindus or muslims - can keep moving forward. I will keep trying my best to not get bogged into personal conflicts. That`s where all the danger lies, and IMO, where much human ignorance comes from. Please help me stay on the straight and narrow if you see me veering away from ideas into personal issues. Thanks.
Learning about Pakistani people has been a very humbling and an eye-opening experience. In every way they are most friendly and most civilized, and best possible (potential) friends Indians can hope for.
I sometimes talk to extremists on our side. I can honestly say that the worst things Pakistanis say on Chowk can often be better than what I hear from some of my Indian friends. Not a fair comparison, but at least it does indicate some things.
I am drawn to playing a small-time ijtehadi, if you will. IMO, all ideas must be continuously brought together to clash against and crash into each other, so that all poeple - not hindus or muslims - can keep moving forward. I will keep trying my best to not get bogged into personal conflicts. That`s where all the danger lies, and IMO, where much human ignorance comes from. Please help me stay on the straight and narrow if you see me veering away from ideas into personal issues. Thanks.
#213 Posted by KaalChakra on April 4, 2005 6:33:45 pm
SR and Malik Saheb
Thanks. You have given us much to think about!
I had concluded that `native Islam` was an enormous hoax played upon all of us by groups of determined outsiders. But SR`s points demand careful consideration. So, for now, I will immediately stop describing native Islam as a fraud.
My general view has been that non native Islam (what I called Islam) is vastly underrated by its enemies.
IMO, this non native Islam is the most powerful political force ever unleased upon mankind. So vastly superior over anything else on the face of the planet is its power to constantly expand its reach and ruthlessly destroy everything else that nothing can stand in its way. Without intending any hyperboel, these are the original nazis of religious life. People who will march through every inch of the globe, unless they are openly challenged and unashamedly cornered by all men and women who are the lovers of intelligence, freedom, creativity, and real spirituality.
But they are NOT undestroyable. Like nazis, or all virulent forms of communism, they have HUGE weaknesses.
Our challenge is one of honestly studying their real strengths. To minimize these strenghts in any way would be the most expensive (and the last) mistake we will ever make. And we must carefully study their real weaknesses, missing and exaggerating none.
It can be done and will have to be done, so we can save the religion we call `native Islam.` Names don`t really matter. As I mentioned, I personally have no great commitment to the `Hinduism` label.
There is a local, yet powerfully universal spirituality that we all share in different forms. That`s what`s worth saving and fighting for.
For more specific comments I seek your permission to return some time later.
Thanks. You have given us much to think about!
I had concluded that `native Islam` was an enormous hoax played upon all of us by groups of determined outsiders. But SR`s points demand careful consideration. So, for now, I will immediately stop describing native Islam as a fraud.
My general view has been that non native Islam (what I called Islam) is vastly underrated by its enemies.
IMO, this non native Islam is the most powerful political force ever unleased upon mankind. So vastly superior over anything else on the face of the planet is its power to constantly expand its reach and ruthlessly destroy everything else that nothing can stand in its way. Without intending any hyperboel, these are the original nazis of religious life. People who will march through every inch of the globe, unless they are openly challenged and unashamedly cornered by all men and women who are the lovers of intelligence, freedom, creativity, and real spirituality.
But they are NOT undestroyable. Like nazis, or all virulent forms of communism, they have HUGE weaknesses.
Our challenge is one of honestly studying their real strengths. To minimize these strenghts in any way would be the most expensive (and the last) mistake we will ever make. And we must carefully study their real weaknesses, missing and exaggerating none.
It can be done and will have to be done, so we can save the religion we call `native Islam.` Names don`t really matter. As I mentioned, I personally have no great commitment to the `Hinduism` label.
There is a local, yet powerfully universal spirituality that we all share in different forms. That`s what`s worth saving and fighting for.
For more specific comments I seek your permission to return some time later.
#212 Posted by sattar2 on April 4, 2005 6:24:04 pm
tahmed,
Putting down faith of others shows lack of civility … I cannot break it down any further. Either a person accepts responsibility for his words ... or he does not. One can be uncivil to another without direct interaction. Your reasoning is childish.
It is irrelevant if you accept Ahmadis as Muslims or not ... these are petty issues ... so let`s try to get past them. You are entitled to your beliefs. However, you cannot justifiably put down faith of others over differences. Your liberty to swing your arm ends where my nose begins. This has nothing to do with Quran … but with basic decency. Sermonizing in one does not guarantee the other.
#211 Posted by tahmed32 on April 4, 2005 5:38:14 pm
hamidm: I agree with you that ahmedis have been oppressed in Pakistan by jamaatiyas - and I have reported on chowk earlier about the shame I still feel at watching helplessly as 8-10 jamaatiya students (too many for me to take on myself) burnt the textbooks of ahmedi students at Broome Hostel back in 1974.
I was comparing them not in the context of who oppressed whom - but in the context of religious beliefs only. And in that context - both are the same in terms of looking towards other men to interpret the Quran for them. I am not saying that they will rot in hell for this, and I am not saying they are bad people - it is not beliefs but actions that make people good or bad.
sattar: Please dont try to try to suck me into another fruitless discussion with you. I have a right to my beliefs, as you are to yours. I will not pretend we are of the same belief - and that does not make me uncivil - no matter how much you may wish to paint me as such. As i said - i have not had any discussion with you on this board and you have started calling me uncivil. jesus christ!! (at least we both believe in HIS prophethood).
I was comparing them not in the context of who oppressed whom - but in the context of religious beliefs only. And in that context - both are the same in terms of looking towards other men to interpret the Quran for them. I am not saying that they will rot in hell for this, and I am not saying they are bad people - it is not beliefs but actions that make people good or bad.
sattar: Please dont try to try to suck me into another fruitless discussion with you. I have a right to my beliefs, as you are to yours. I will not pretend we are of the same belief - and that does not make me uncivil - no matter how much you may wish to paint me as such. As i said - i have not had any discussion with you on this board and you have started calling me uncivil. jesus christ!! (at least we both believe in HIS prophethood).
#210 Posted by MaheshG2 on April 4, 2005 5:29:01 pm
kaalchakra: While extremists get all the press, the fact is that the average Pakistani is by temprament among the most tolerant people on earth. For normal people like you in India (as opposed to the extremists in your country), Pakistan will over time prove to be a good friend and and open and welcoming country. As thousands of Indians found out last year.
As opposed to a million people in Bangladesh in 1971?????
Who are you trying to kid?
As opposed to a million people in Bangladesh in 1971?????
Who are you trying to kid?
#209 Posted by anil on April 4, 2005 5:16:44 pm
Re: # 155
Nazar:
There is no central authority in Hindus to give a single definition of Hindu. Even during the Hindu revival there were four Shankaracharyas, and not one. One definition that I saw was by Dr. S. Radhakrishnan, in his book, as someone who will accept the philosophies in Vedas, and Upnishads and can says that I am a Hindu. Interestingly, no one has ever ruled out ``shastrath`` (debates) on Hinduism, therefore, even the acceptance does not imply belief.
Anil
Nazar:
There is no central authority in Hindus to give a single definition of Hindu. Even during the Hindu revival there were four Shankaracharyas, and not one. One definition that I saw was by Dr. S. Radhakrishnan, in his book, as someone who will accept the philosophies in Vedas, and Upnishads and can says that I am a Hindu. Interestingly, no one has ever ruled out ``shastrath`` (debates) on Hinduism, therefore, even the acceptance does not imply belief.
Anil
#208 Posted by anil on April 4, 2005 5:16:35 pm
Re: # 155
Nazar:
There is no central authority in Hindus to give a single definition of Hindu. Even during the Hindu revival there were four Shankaracharyas, and not one. One definition that I saw was by Dr. S. Radhakrishnan, in his book, as someone who will accept the philosophies in Vedas, and Upnishads and can says that I am a Hindu. Interestingly, no one has ever ruled out ``shastrath`` (debates) on Hinduism, therefore, even the acceptance does not imply belief.
Anil
Nazar:
There is no central authority in Hindus to give a single definition of Hindu. Even during the Hindu revival there were four Shankaracharyas, and not one. One definition that I saw was by Dr. S. Radhakrishnan, in his book, as someone who will accept the philosophies in Vedas, and Upnishads and can says that I am a Hindu. Interestingly, no one has ever ruled out ``shastrath`` (debates) on Hinduism, therefore, even the acceptance does not imply belief.
Anil
#207 Posted by sattar2 on April 4, 2005 5:11:47 pm
tahmed,
One does not necessarily have to interact with another in order to be uncivil. Putting down faith of others … for no good reason … is uncivil behavior in itself. It reeks of self-righteousness and hypocrisy. This Sahib is a public forum … so let’s not hide behind the childish “I am not talking to you” excuse.
It seems that a lifetime study of Quran has failed to teach you basic decency and civility. And that`s a travesty for the ummah. No Sahib ... give me a break ...
#206 Posted by hamidm2 on April 4, 2005 5:08:09 pm
tahmed,
....... you say:
``after all, they think mirza received wahi, and jamaatiyas think maudoodi had some special knowledge that makes the Quran irrelevant. The two are almost indistinguishable in ideology``.......
....... i think it is awfully unfair to compare the oppressed to the oppressor ....... the qadianis are a persecuted minority that is fighting for its survival ........ the rabid majority consisting of barelvis, deobandis, wahabis and now the koranists are ganging up on them ......... it is a shame
....... you say:
``after all, they think mirza received wahi, and jamaatiyas think maudoodi had some special knowledge that makes the Quran irrelevant. The two are almost indistinguishable in ideology``.......
....... i think it is awfully unfair to compare the oppressed to the oppressor ....... the qadianis are a persecuted minority that is fighting for its survival ........ the rabid majority consisting of barelvis, deobandis, wahabis and now the koranists are ganging up on them ......... it is a shame
#205 Posted by anil on April 4, 2005 5:03:22 pm
Re: # 155
Nazar:
There is no central authority in Hindus to give a single definition of Hindu. Even during the Hindu revival there were four Shankaracharyas, and not one. One definition that I saw was by Dr. S. Radhakrishnan, in his book, as someone who will accept the philosophies in Vedas, and Upnishads and can says that I am a Hindu. Interestingly, no one has ever ruled out ``shastrath`` (debates) on Hinduism, therefore, even the acceptance does not imply belief.
Anil
Nazar:
There is no central authority in Hindus to give a single definition of Hindu. Even during the Hindu revival there were four Shankaracharyas, and not one. One definition that I saw was by Dr. S. Radhakrishnan, in his book, as someone who will accept the philosophies in Vedas, and Upnishads and can says that I am a Hindu. Interestingly, no one has ever ruled out ``shastrath`` (debates) on Hinduism, therefore, even the acceptance does not imply belief.
Anil
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- MeiraJ08: Even in poetry it... Honor Killings in Babakot
- MeiraJ08: There is no way... Greek Tragedy
- allah001: Tahmed32: Getting bombed back to... US Commando Strike in
- allah001: Naeemchaudary, If you are... US Commando Strike in
- allah001: hamidm: "the way i see... US Commando Strike in
- tahmed32: #40 majumdar bhai: rest... US Commando Strike in
- hamidm2: Re: # 44 naeem mian, ........ US Commando Strike in
- tahmed32: A dose of reality... US Commando Strike in
