Mr. Ahmed

echoboom:

you write ``pehlay hanuman, phir insaan``

But...how about this gentleman mullah omar (last seen heading out of kabul on the back of a motorcycle). Would he qualify as the missing link?? (Just trying to be funny - dont get mad because you know what happens: you start using poster-sized fonts that really messes up this board.)



more seriously, I find this ``we indians are so modern and you muslims are so primitive`` message of this article irritating as well. Coming from a land of astrologers and tons of primitive customs and beliefs, this attitude of indians on chowk is obviously stupid. But that does not mean that the mullah omars of afghanistan are any less primitive.

dostmittar:
You aren`t a dost of mine for nothing.

Yeah! I did have a hunch something was amiss when I was typing that. Thanks a lot. No wonder CHOWK is such a great place to be.

Bundho-Padhyays notwithstanding. Thanks Ali.

This article is like a HUGE Bundho-Padhay! I mean its a colossal Bundho-Padhay.... breaks the record of earlier Bundho-Padhays from Veeresh Malik (there are no chemists in Rawalpindi)...

So let`s trust the author and assume that Faruk Ahmed exists, and also agree with him and his wife that Faruk Ahmed is a chutya of the first degree, but please oh please, how does Mr. and Mrs. Bundho-padhay come to the conclusion that ALL muslims, all frikkin 1 billion plus muslims are like Faruk Ahmed...... How can this exalted Hindu, higher than Divedis and lower than Chutar-vedis, (thanks for the info DM saab) after talking to one muslim, just one frikkin muslim, assume that ALL muslims are doomed...

(“He has no idea what he’s dealing with” she said absently. “No idea”, I thought gloomily, “he has absolutely no clue”.)

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

Mr. Bangopadhyay:

I wouldn`t blame Mr. Ahmad. It depends upon what they teach in Aghan history books. If they do not teach about pre-islamic history they cannot be expected to know any better.
In my experience, every Afghan I have met shows a great deal of affection for Indians; generally more so than they do for Pakistanis.



echoboom#28

You disappoint me!

-It`s not Tridevi but Trivedi (as in three-vedas
-Bandopadhyays are not inferior to Trivedis. Trivedis are higher than Dwedis but lower to Chaturvedis in U.P and M.P. But in Bengal, Bangopadhyays (anglicised into Bannerjees) are among the top brahmins. Most Bangopodhays ate meat, most Trivedis were vegetarians.

BTW this old classification is meaninful only to sociologists; very few hindus care or even know about these things any more.

Hello chusni/echoboom

tea?-

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

adfand #19 writes ``If Darwin was correct all the dwellers of ancient Afgahnistan were monkies...The reality is what you see there now. ``

Apes in turbans??

mohar: 24:

But when this line is blurted out everytime somebody says you were once a hindu - that points to different psyche.

#16 and #17 were specifically addressed

you have been here since Oct 2002? you must have read a few posts my me to figure out where i stand on this tunnel-visioned religion-nationality debate that we see almost on every board?

my first thread here addressed to the writer was a wistful one...musing had he appealed to the insaniyat...humanism for want of a better word in us..then it would have further elevated this story...just my tuppence...bus itni si baat hay/thee...

rgds

t

...the author is very cleverly conveying that even educated muslims are basically assholes and are slightly cukoo and there is no hope for them... and anyone not agreeing to this pov is a jihadi as well...;)

Re: # 22 temp
[...to me every child, man, woman is a human being first ...what is so wrong with this thinking? ...]

Nothing. That`s a good thinking ..... But when this line is blurted out everytime somebody says you were once a hindu - that points to different psyche.

asfand,
I guess you did not understand what the author wanted to convey. He wanted to tell the gentleman that we have a shared history. The islamic invaders from Afghanistan are well known so no point saying them again, instead the author tried of an earlier past. It does not matter if the religion that afghanis followed at that time was hinduism or something esle. But the other gentlemen was narrow minded enough to refuse to even consider a pre-islamic past.

mohair:

re 16-17

could it be that you are totally misreading me?

to me every child, man, woman is a human being first

what is so wrong with this thinking?

rgds

t

Re: # 19 asfand
//...If Darwin was correct all the dwellers of ancient Afgahnistan were monkies. ...//

This guy is even better:)) He has gone a step further - from ``we-are-all-humans`` to ``we-are-all-monkies``. I am sure another paki is getting ready with ``we-are-all-amoebas`` line.

Jeez.

Re: # 18 bell
//...It is the likes of you that fan the fanatics..//

Yes sir - it`s all because of me. I am your guy. Kill me and fanatics are gone :))

Two points:


1)
“Why, there was a time when all Afghanistanis were Hindu. Do you know the story of Gandhari?”

They were hindus or the followers of Santana Dharma? Calling the dwellers of ancient Afghanistan Hindus would be wrong. They were the followers of Santana Dharma.

2)
If Darwin was correct all the dwellers of ancient Afgahnistan were monkies.

So what is the point in writung this piece.

The reality is what you see there now.

Asfand Siddiqui