A Journey Through Our Conscience

re: Urstruly

Urstruly, I have a few questions you.

Please state what is the actual status accorded to women in Islam and under Islamic law.

You and I have interacted over many issues over a long period of time on Chowk. You are aware of my position on the issue of Sharia and Islam in Pakistan. It is with this in mind, that I have to ask you a straightforward question.

Are you confident that if Sharia law is implemented in Pakistan, it will be truly an Islamic law?

My own fear is that Sharia will not be implented in Pakistan in an Islamic sense, because religion is periodically twisted for political ends in Pakistan. Therefore, any theocractic law and in its imposition in Pakistan risks a political interpretation and given the levels of acute intolerances prevailing in Pakistani society, such a law will only help in solidfying moral autuocracy of a vocal minority. Pakistan is not homgeneous society in a religious sense, because it contains both sunni and shia Muslims, Christians, Hindus and Sikhs and Parsis. In a religious sense, Pakistan is pluralistic society and no one religious law can be imposed fairly, unless Pakistan hopes to achieve a dictatorship of the majority through a religous decree.

A good law reflects justice, because it is based on the values of common sense grounded in the imperfections of the society, which it tries to clarify by being fair to all concerned parties. A theocratic law will not gurantee this idea and it will, by its very nature, seek to tilt the playing field unevenly in favor of one group over another. This would create injustice, because all the religions in Pakistan will be judged on the basis of the morality of one religion.

This then raises the issue of who is going to decide the morality of the dominant religion in Pakistan?

The nightmarish concern in Pakistan is that its clergy is woefully ignorant of religion and what they preach as a religion is nothing more than a highly skewed form of culturalism. Given the lack of religious education and understanding within the clergy of Pakistan itself about Islam and its teachings, a theocracatic law will only create injustice, resentment and resistence towards Islam and in many ways, this will only cause harm to Islam in particular and will bring no good to Pakistan in general.

Urstruly, the real problem in implementing Islamic Sharia law in Pakistan is not the Pakistani society, but it is the clergy itself which is confused on the issue of what is Islam!

Ciao

I condemn temporals, romairs and ferozks for knowing the right thing in their subconcious but not taking the extra mile because it requires a lot of courage. these optimists are seekers of reconsiliation with the very thing which is the root of all the problems. yes, i am talking about the flawed concept of religion.

if you think if stars, you will get stars but if you think of an apple on a tree, well you will get an apple.

Re: # 79 ntsyed

Yes your contention about Li`an is correct. I apologize for the error. HEre I post the relavant verse so that there remains no doubt.

``And for those who launch a charge against their
spouses, and have (in support) no evidence but their own,- their solitary
evidence (can be received) if they bear witness four times (with an oath) by
Allah that they are solemnly telling the truth; And the fifth (oath) (should be)
that they solemnly invoke the curse of Allah on themselves if they tell a lie.
But it would avert the punishment from the wife, if she bears witness four times
(with an oath) By Allah, that (her husband) is telling a lie; And the fifth
(oath) should be that she solemnly invokes the wrath of Allah on herself if (her
accuser) is telling the truth``. An-Nur (The Light) 24:6-9



On a sidenote, I must tell you that, you were doing quite well yourself, until you fell for the `abdulhate` trap. Please bear in mind that these tactics are used to stifle debate. Our objective and our mission is bigger than us. We are not out here to humiliate people, our mission is to convey the message we are charged with. Please keep your eyes at the goal.

Re: #39

Urstruly,

Salute to you sir... Alhumdulillah He has belssed you with very valuable knowledge; may He add to it for our benefit and yours, ameen. Needless to say, I thoroughly enjoy your posts.

However, I wish to offer a correction to the following:
**In Lia`an, the judge first asks accuser to decalre under oath that he is telling the truth about his or her spouse`s infidelity and if he is telling a lie then may Allah`s curse be upon him/her. The accuser has to take this oath verbally three times on Qura`n. Then judge repeats the same procedure with accused where he or she declares under oath that his accuser is telling a lie and if not then may Allah`s curse be upon him/her.**

According to An-Nur, verses 6-9, both the the accuser and the accused (in case of not-guilty plea) have to testify four times and then fifth testimony should be the invoking of Allah if they lie, thereby confirming their allegation and its rebuttal a total of five (5) times each.

Kindly correct me if I`m wrong!

Jazak-Allah-khair

Re: #56

The idea may be worth trying, but there`s a small problem with it. It leaves out the Pseudo Joe Hates of the world to wreak havoc outside. We must think of something to tame these buggers too.

:-)

Dear Sajal,

A very well written article. Had a comment for Romair which applies here as well. . .

Rumair: I dont think it is just the responsibility of women to stand up against injustice targeted at women. Those who occupy privileged positions in society are just as responsible as those who arent and in fact occupy more leverage. It is very convenient I am sure to tell your wife if you dont do something about it first I wont either. Finger pointing is childish. I think it needs to be a joint stand - not just women.

Corina

Dear Sajal,

A very well written article. Had a comment for Romair which applies here as well. . .

Rumair: I dont think it is just the responsibility of women to stand up against injustice targeted at women. Those who occupy privileged positions in society are just as responsible as those who arent and in fact occupy more leverage. It is very convenient I am sure to tell your wife if you dont do something about it first I wont either. Finger pointing is childish. I think it needs to be a joint stand - not just women.

Corina

re: #58

dear kaalchakra!

I appreciate your sincere advice... actually that`s very kind of you to do so.

**So even though I think you are a raving fool, and a mad man, ..**

In all seriousness... the above coming from you, I`m touched by these honorary titles! That`s how my beloved Prophet (pbuh) and his companions (ra) were treated when they spoke the truth unabashedly. Hopefully, these honors from you and more from others here will get me closer to them on the Day of Judgement and afterwards.

Salaam.

Re: #59

actually your hopping mad bactracking is so hilarious, I`m in a rush too... to the relieve my bladder so I can laugh even harder.

For bactracking, read your original post again to see the impression emanating from it.

He (pbuh) was indeed a man of flesh and blood, which he sacrificed in many ways to bring civility to you and me. Yet you insist on being a Pseudo Joe Hate. Anyway, in spite of being a human, he (pbuh) was even above archangel Jibraeel (as), for he (pbuh) was invited by his Master for an audience where even Jibraeel (as) could not go lest he be burned. Read the Prophet pbuh`s ascent to the Allah`s Throne for the only audience He has ever allowed anyone.

Therefore, he was even more infallible than Jibraeel (as) and the dearest to Allah among all His creations; not that, m`az Allah, Jibraeel (as) was not infallible... he was beyond any shadow of doubt.

A ``special`` man is restricted to rain man or Hopping Mad Pseudo Joe Hate ABCDs of this mortal world.

messing the message: it was a proactive manoeuver to prevent you from being possessed by Sattar & co.

As for the titles you endow on me so generously... how can a miskeen 3rd world abdul hate like me even try to snatch anything like that from you? the whole suite of which is reserved entirely for the ABCD-Thali-ka-baingans-gora-sarkar-Pseudo-Joe-Hates-Abdul-Hates like you. Paon laagun maharaj, naraaj hoyo, galati huey maray se.

may Allah guide you in anger management!

One word of advice though, if I can, please don`t let your pants drop any lower than it has. The openness comes with vulnerabilities, and if insha Allah abdul hates succeed in their efforts, your exposed behind may be flogged with a whip not of your choice... actually that may not be a bad idea to experience a successful attempt made by a Joe Hate to be pushed back into his mother`s womb. I know it`s unnatural, but the whipping may do the trick. See mj or hamid for proper interpretation.

uh oh... he`s in a rush again... to the bathroom to submerge his lit behind in the toilet bowl to vaporize the entire water therein.

Relax... lay back... have a cigar... chowk is full of hopping mad Joe`s like you.

Ciao hombre!

Re: #60 & 62

hmmm...

kaalchakra, how could that happen? I know #60 is mine. Is someone trying to screw with the system?

that`s the first i`ve ever seen.

Oh well...

nts: # 84

messing the message: it was a proactive manoeuver to prevent you from being possessed by Sattar & co.

you are delusional

:)

Re: # 87
Thanks, for a considered response.What I have come to conclude is that there are not one but two basic assumptions or faiths; the existence of Allah and the perfection of Allah, or that allah is good, and that He cannot prescribe anything wrong.and that the concept of ``goodness`` or ``perfection`` can exist outside or prior to the belief in all what Allah says.From these two(Existence of Allah and perfection of Allah) follow the conclusion that whatever Allah said must be believed.It may have been implicit, but for the comprehension of a non believer like myself, I thought I would break it down. Thanks again.

Re: #68

Rahul, very good question, and it has a very simple answer.

First of all the faith requires basis, without any basis no one can have any faith in anyone or anything.

But once the basis has been amply established, then the faith is never, and should never be, questioned. Otherwise the whole faith, by virtue of its definition, goes out the window.

Now, limited faith is possible in case of humans or its institutions or other mortal objects as they all have some level of imperfection. For example, when you were a child, after you learned to trust your parents that they`d never let any harm come to you, did you question them on how to eat, walk, talk, and everything else they told you to do? But as you grew older and gradually began to think on your own, you started to notice their imperfections as human beings, albeit their unconditional love and unquestionable sincerity towards you. Thus, then onwards, you did what you thought was the best thing to do under any given situation.

As for Allah, there is no imperfection about Him. Thus, no question of disobeying Him.

With His infinite love He has amply established that He loves us (His believers more than the disbelievers) many times more than our parents could, so we cannot question His wisdom, for the simple fact that we cannot even fathom Who He is.

The following fact illustrates how He keeps His promise even with the disbelievers, out of nothing but infinite justice and mercy: in spite of the fact that some of us wantonly deny His Existence, disrespect Him without any rhyme or reason, flout His Instructions which benefit only us, and even declare war against Him, He continues to fulfill His promise to provide them and their loved ones with their sustenance until their predetermined time on earth ends. Can our parents put up with us if we declared a war against them or even disrespected them?

Therefore, we just have to patiently continue obeying His commands and His wisdoms will appear to us in due time when our minds are ready for them. Just as you used to be patient in spite of your hunger that your parents will bring something for you to eat.

Please don`t mistake the preceding example, as in we`re His children because we`re NOT. Rather we`re only one of His many creations. We are as small and vulnerable to Him as infants are to his/her parents. Just like children think of their adults too big and too old, we cannot even fathom who He is or what He may look like.

Then rationally speaking, we cannot imagine all His wisdom and powers either... not at once. His wisdom only appears to those who obey His commands, because without carrying out any instructions one can never ascertain the benefits/disadvantages even in worldly terms.

Secondly, He has created this whole universe. Each and every component of this universe does exactly what He has instructed them to do, with the exception of human beings. Everything He has permitted us and everything He has deemed prohibited for us, are for our benefit and the benefit of the entire universe.

for example: He told us not to horde but share, and do not plunder, and do not deceive others. But we continue to disobey. It`s not that there isn`t enough food to go around to every single one of 6plus billion people, but some of us become greedy and refuse to share. Some become even more greedy and rob others by deceipt and/or force. And the results of our disobedience is right before us in terms of deteriorating enviroment, starvation, bloodshed, and so forth.

Therefore, believing in Him demands that we obey every single of His commands.

It can be a very lengthy topic, because His Existence is not trivial and requires thinking and continuous search for answers. But I hope my response, which I tried to keep as brief as I could, should answer your question to some extent.

take care.

It`s ironic that the anti-Sharia crowd can`t see the obvious written statements by Ustruly and Romair that they are just as against the current form of Hudood ordinance as everyone else, including myself.

The other thing that eludes this crowd is that this alone, even if perfectly stipulated in the big scheme of Pakistani hodge-podge law, could not be expected to function to its maximum potential to benefit the people.

Why?

Because, the judiciary has to be supported by the legislature, the law enforcement, and the people. Unfortunately, no none of them support this, or any law for that matter, in a positive manner.

In order to effectively implement the Shari`a, the current traditional political bandits, traditional mullahs, and the law-enforcement have to be removed and/or rehabilitated. Although, I prefer outright removal.

Women, children, elderly, as well as a common man, particularly victimized ones, need to be protected by all of the aforementioned. As one lady has righty pointed that it`s not just women`s job to standup to the injustices, both men and women have to work together. The police and legislature also have to do their parts with sincerity. Like Urstruly said, police is wrong to imprison and charge the victimized women when their claim of rape is unproven. The policeman who does that needs to be severely punished. The legislator who turns a blind eye to such corruption needs to be punished equally severely, if not more. The people that witnesses who do not testify need to be held accountable. Most importantly people will have to implement the Shari`a individually on themselves, and only then can expect the other parts of the society to support them. Women can`t walk around unveiled and expect not to be harassed by ill mannered men. Similarly, men can`t go around harassing women just because they`re not veiled.

The problem with the incident reported by Urstruly is that kalashnikovs can be very intimidating for common folks to prevent them from testifying against the perps. Not to mention, commonly such perps are also very well connected in the law-enforcement and legislature, and I can testify to that from my personal experience, at least the law-enforcement part. That`s why they are able to do whatever they want with impunity in broad daylight.

Secondly, the shari`a cannot prosecute a man without evidence, as is the case in any country. The simple reason being, the charge could be fraudulent if there were no witnesses. If there were witnesses, then the judiciary and law enforcement need to protect the witnesses as well as the victim.

The ladies on this board should think of a scenario in which their fathers, brothers, husbands, or sons were falsely accused of rape by a woman? Would they still want the law to prosecute them if these men couldn`t prove their innocence? Please think about it rationally, not emotionally.

The point is that true Shari`a law maintains a balanced approach, so neither party could abuse it. The half-assed implementation of this Hudood law is the main reason men of influence are able to abuse the women, as urstruly and romair have made abundantly clear.

Shari`a is not flawed; it`s the entire machinery of corrupt government which does not allow ANY law, shari`a or secular, to be implemented and enforced properly.

The question is, should we abandon the Shari`a altogether and introduce even more openness into the society, or implement Shari`a in its entirety to ensure protection and justice for all?

In my personal opinion from my study of the western ideals of openness, openning up the society will further exacerbate the situation; especially when the legislature and law enforcement are brazenly corrupt and the populace is scared out of wits. The simple fact of life is that openness causes more vulenrability than security. It will exploit the people, especially women, in ways that we cannot even imagine. Some of my Indian friends tell me that in colleges there, the situation due to openness is such that girls have to get hooked up with a guy or two and provide services in exchange for protection. How much of that is true, I don`t know. But from my experience in the west where date rapes and every conceivable kind of rape is more common than anywhere in the planet, it is a very likely possibility.

Therefore, a comprehensive implementation of Shari`a - not just hudood as its token - is deperately needed here. The first thing true Shari`a accomplishes is the prevention of crimes, as was the case with Taliban even though there may been flaws in their implementation of Shari`a, there were almost no crimes during their reign. It remains the case in KSA, where several of key Shari`s components are missing, very little crime persists as compared to other nations. In both cases, women were/are much more safe at homes and outside, people were/are able to walk around openly with wads of money without any fear of mugging, to name just a couple.

Such prevention is achieved first with the behavior, dress codes, strict measures against authoritative corruption, etc. The second and equally important factor is severe punishements for the offenders.

The only thing is that women will not be able to go out without proper hijab (as prescribed in the Quran) - including the abaya, not just the headscarf - and men will have to keep their gazes low even if a woman is not following that dress code. It is only for the law enforcement to pursue the people in violation of the codes. Others can only report it and cannot take the law into their own hands, except in self-defense.

People think that implementation of Shari`a tomorrow will redden the five rivers with blood. To the contrary, just the nastiest of perpetrators need to be meted out severest sentences according to the law - i.e. public flogging, execution, etc - will keep the rest of the wannabe criminals from pursuing their perverted fantasies.

But that kind of system needs a full-fledged grass-roots revolution, which is already brewing contrary to what people may believe. It`ll not be the fazloos to lead such a revolution. I think they will be the first to be done away with. People are just as much tired of the pseudo gora laws and their corrupt proponents as they are of fake mullahs who exploit Islam and their constituents just to step into the President or Prime Minister`s residence.

Corina #81: ``Rumair: I dont think it is just the responsibility of women to stand up against injustice targeted at women.``

I am not saying it is just the, ``responsibility`` of the women. What I am saying, however, is that practically speaking, they are the ones who will have to take their rights. They need to take the initiative. They shouldn`t expect others to give it to them, or get them for them. This is how it always works. The group that is suppressed has to fight it out, for themselves. No one ever voluntarily gives anyone their rights.

I am just defining a real life situation and solution. Not the ideal solution. And I don`t think women should wait around hoping that someone else will give their rights to them..........

Re: # 92

temporal mian,

......... i think my sister has the right approach ........ there is something terribly wrong with these mullahs - most of them are women haters and child abusers ......... in the last one year my brother has gone through three maulvi sahibs who insisted on twisting my six year old nephew`s ears or pinching his stomach while teaching him the koran - the poor kid is traumatized and is visibly disturbed at the sight of a bearded man ...........

......... maybe that is why god invented daisy-cutters .........