The Alternative Muslim Identity

F. Zehra Rizvi,

Far be it from me to find fault with a nuanced perspective, but how can you in the same para acknowledge that you agree with many of Manji`s ideas and then outrightly dismiss them as ``kneejerk reactionary`` without unpacking some her and your ideas? You should have some of her text or specific examples of her ideological position.

Secondly, are you occupying the space of the political class in Iran so vividly discussed in Sara Suleri`s, Marjane Satrapi`s, and Azadeh Moaveni`s respective work?

Be America. (period).

re: rozaiba # 2

I agree.

Ciao

Zehra, how can you admit to deciding not to be a believing Muslim anymore and then after 9/11 a political Muslim only (i.e. you don`t believe in the dogma--that is, aqidah) and then write about an alternative Muslim identity? Shouldn`t that then be left to Muslims to worry about?

Unless, of course, you still believe in Islam, after all!

It does confirm as the whole world knows, Americans are far and by large, idiots. Idiot Americans, though a pleasant topic..............

And you wonder why Muslims are increasingly hated by `other` Americans?.And how are you going to `stay` in America when you disparage its` citizens?.You think the rest of the American population is going to welcome you after you publicly denounce them as `idiots`.You and your kind are doing more damage to the future of muslims in America than the in-bred hijackers/suicide bombers did.I was ``there`` 9/11 and i have scars to remind me for the rest of my life.I am an American and i resent you referring my fellow citizens as ``idiots``.IDIOT YOU.

zehra,

why the need to fit into a category, especially a category based upon something as subjective and subject to controversy as religion

why can`t you just be zehra, a woman with her own personal dynamic identity


i`m beginning to dislike this whole `progressive muslim` crap, it`s such an oxymoron

religion is regressive period

Zehra Rizvi ji

In all these years of reading your articles as a closet fan of yours, this is the first piece from you that left me disappointed.

It`s difficult to pinpoint why,.... and even the disappointing stuff from you is better than the best most other people come up with. So you have my thumbs up :)

As a fan, can`t help making a small comment, only in the spirit of trying to be helpful.

Notice that comments 1-7 are from 7 different people who view the world in 7 different ways. Yet all have expressed reservations.

IMHO, the reason is that, for the first time, you have given up clarity. Faced with an understandably difficult situation, in this article, you opted for the comfort of fuzziness, self-created confusion in which people far lesser than you find refuge when they can`t face facts.

There are only two or three grown ups on chowk who will love this piece. And as a fan of yours, let me tell you, woh log aapki jootiyon ke barabar bhi nahi hain. :)

Zehra:

I understand where you are coming from. But the thing is, the minute we start using labels like “alternative” and “progressive” we are drawing lines in the sand. Those same ones mind you that we professed not to draw. Why not be a pluralist and not align yourself with any one? Group ideology and ``movements`` come with personal agendas and then we are back to the same old, same old.

I agree with scout on this one. Just be you. The “muslim-ness” will take care of itself :).

On someone’s recommendations on Chowk, I visited the Muslims wakeup site. I did not take me long to figure out that the whole idea is oxy moron. They are talking about the same things that “sleeping” Muslims talk and they are still pushing guidance from the Quran and Sunnah or Sharia or whatever. Their attempt is to put a new spin on the whole rotten idea of a united Muslim alliance or Ummah.

The first and the foremost thing to do for Muslims, is to drop the “guidance from Islam” idea on the current day political issues. The minute you begin to seek guidance from Islam on current century’s political issue, you invariably come up with solutions that, I am afraid, were not even practical during the golden years of Mecca and Medina and basically failed against the human nature.

One must admit the fact that the so called Islamic society in Medina/Mecca cannot be a model for the large multicultural, multiethnic, and multi-tiered Economic states that exist today. As long as Muslims, whether they are progressive or regressive, conservative or liberal continue to look to Islam for resolving political or economic issues they will remain delusional.

Islam has no mysterious powers to resolve issues that arise out of territorial, economic, or scientific disputes. One may find a quote here and a quote there and stretch it to apply to the recurring issues but that is really rolling the dice and hoping for the best.
Islam does not provide any comprehensive guideline in Political, economic and scientific and other fields or studies and disputes.
People may seek guidance on moral and social issues such as gays, marriage, and divorce but beyond that Islam or for that matter any religion has no role to play.

Directionless, pointless, senseless, confused, poorly written.

talking of oxymorons.. there is one more i had heard on this site: ``Muslim Feminist``.. my favorite oxymoron these days.. :-)

and i wonder why i dont get to hear about Christian-Feminists, Alternative-Catholic-Identity, Hindu-World, Hindu-Women, Buddhistwakeup.com...


why are muslims are so keen to thrust their Muslim thingy in public space as an ID.? Why cant there be Just Pakistanis, Iranis, Turkis etc.?

From the article:

[[Americans are far and by large, idiots.]]

Wow! How progressive!

So you have a good mixture of the East Coast Liberal`s sneer at the great unwashed masses and the believer`s sneer for the infidels. Thats what it means to be a `progressive` Muslim.

Well done. Islam is safe.

there`s no need to get all upset at the mention of idiot americans. . . there are idiots everywhere of all shapes, and sizes. hyphenated and defying labels.

what was the real point to this article?! most of it was telling us what was not up for discussion and that in itself is rather telling.

labels. and when we want to do away with those labels, we add more labels. and then more, and this labelling thing never ends. . . i can see where having an identity and making a home wherever one chooses to are important. and that being in this world, we have more than one identity. but do we have to box the hell out of ourselves in these identities? at some point, in this boxing in, and drawing lines as miriam says, we forget what it is to be human, and humble.

khair, i thought i had more to say, but my tummy`s rumbing and i realize looking at the time, that i haven`t eaten all day.

hasta la vista!

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

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

#1 by Saminasha on June 19, 2005 7:54am PT


Secondly, are you occupying the space of the political class in Iran so vividly discussed in Sara Suleri`s, Marjane Satrapi`s, and Azadeh Moaveni`s respective work?


Ok professor....we get it....you read a lot of books...

:)

Arjun,

hey...no one said that what Fatima Zehra is in the process of developing and sorting out is easy...but some of the ideas being discussed in this piece seem to refer to the Bhabian theory of the ``third space``.

Fatima Zehra,

I hope that you understand that I am showing my respect for your work by asking the questions I did. I`m starting to think of Manji`s work in terms of James Baldwin`s stances in relation with Black/Jewish/Anglo Muslim/Christian communities....we went over one of his essays on Richard Wright`s Native Son, and some of his points are blazingly relevant.

i`m afraid arjun isn`t going to understand what the `bhabian theory of the third space` is here. neither will some of the other interactors.

samina, would you care to explain what that is exactly? :) (without quoting bhabha if possible. i`ve found that translations are sometimes needed for what he has to say)

Re: # 3 that was french :)

in regards to #20. . . samina, koi na. i`m searching for the explanation meself. don`t worry yourself about it. i`ll bring it here as you believe it`s pertinent, and then you can elaborate.

a.

okay. . .

i remember when i bought my copy of homi bhabha`s ``the location of culture,`` i felt myself drowning in his words, and was relieved that i could actually make sense out of more than i thought i could. ironically, when i was getting ready to take my MA comps. in english literature and i told my post-colonial lit. examiner that i was reading bhabha, she told me to forget bhabha for the time being. i ended up forgetting bhabha for a long while. :)) every so often though bhabha pops up as a reminder not to dismiss him completely.

i`m posting this from another site, since i no longer have ``the location of culture`` with me, and so the explanation is from a benjamin graves. and he explains it rather well, i think. better than i could at least. so apologies in advance for the cut n` paste rather than explaining something ``theoretical`` meself.

Whereas Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak uses deconstruction as a critical tool to rethink the oversimplified binary opposition of ``colonizer`` and ``colonized`` and to question the methodological assumptions of postcolonial theorists (herself included), Homi K. Bhabha uses deconstruction to dismantle the false opposition of ``theory`` and ``political practice``--a distinction reminiscent in many ways of Marx`s distinction between superstructure and base. Bhabha advocates a model of liminality that perhaps dramatizes the interstitial space between theory and practice--a liminal space that does not separate but rather mediates their mutual exchange and relative meanings. Bhabha argues (perhaps in defense of himself) that European theoretical frameworks are not necessarily intellectual constructs that ignore the political situation of the dispossessed Third World. A critic cannot choose between ``politics`` and ``theory`` because the two are mutually reciprocal; ``theory,`` an instrument of ideology, narrates and in so doing creates the ``political`` circumstance of Third World oppression. In other words, much as he treats the the ``liminal`` space between national constituencies, Bhabha is interested in juxtaposing ``politics`` and ``theory`` in order to find where they overlap and how the tension between them in turn produces their hybridity:

The pact of interpretation is never simply an act of communication between the I and the You designated in the statement. The production of meaning requires that these two places be mobilized in the passage through a Third Space, which represents both the general conditions of language and the specific implication of the utterance in a performative and institutional strategy of which it canot `in itself` be conscious. (The Location of Culture 36)

According to Bhabha, the ``third space``--another way of framing the liminal--is an ambivalent, hybrid space that is written into existence. In other words, what mediates between theory and politics is writing--not merely theoretical discourse but cultural exercises such as novels, cinema, music. As Jacques Derrida suggests in Writing and Differance, writing does not passively record social ``realities`` but in fact precedes them and gives them meaning through a recognition of the differences between signs within textual systems. Bhabha, then, re-appropriates Derrida`s notion of differance to suggest cultural difference and its representation and negotiation in the form of writing.

from ``the commitment to theory`` benjamin graves, brown university.

if you want to wade through more of this, here is the site:

http://www.scholars.nus.edu.sg/landow/post/poldiscourse/bhabha/bhabha3.html

Ana,

Well my thesis and doctoral work concerns itself with the creation of alterity and third spaces, an ideological site of fluid and overlapping identities for postcolonial scholarship. Suleri, Satrapi and Moaveni (as well as Amitava Kumar and Suketu Mehta) use the genre of the memoir but have rewritten the genre itself so that their texts become the discourse of several political, historical and personal identities. Because the binaries of the ``western`` or the ``eastern`` genre cannot provide this location of in betweenness/shifting alterity, third space critiques the notion of `authenticity` by its very mediated and mediating existence.

thanks samina. :)

after posting all that, what comes to mind is amitabh bachchan`s hilarious dialogues during the song, ``my name is anthony gonsalves.``

those who remember it will know what i`m talking about. :)

ana,

apparently film writers are a LOT smarter than they are allowed to let on in their films according to Mehta`s Maximum City....but I think Mira Nair is really engaging these issues, particularly if Vanity Fair is any indication of how smart Mira really, really is...

I think we are getting more and more confused and lost in an effort to search for the right ‘category’ that we can associate ourselves with. Categorizing is a mere effort to search for right association and relationship. Unfortunately, associations and relationships in general, change all the time. If our identities are related with these relationships, then our identities are changing too. This may very well explain the cause for the identity crises so common these days.

It seems, we humans, have a pressing need to associate ourselves with a group for the sole purpose of realizing an identity for ourselves. It’s a Rule, I guess. Once we have done that, we start feeling comfortable that there are people who are ‘like’ minded and believe in what ‘we’ believe, those who do not, are ‘others’. The ‘others’ translate into oppositions, enemies, and what not. This process happens around us all the time. From a group of four gathered in a social family meeting, to rulers who are forming rules for countries. So who is right? What is right? It’s all relative. Is it really so important to associate ourselves, one way or the other? Maybe so…but what if we try to break this rule? Is it possible?

Here’s a thought. As an individual I’d like to retain my individuality. My religion is a very personal matter, and I want to be respected for what I am, and what I think. In the same token, I should respect others for their individuality and beliefs. I should share my opinions and respect others’. I should either agree or agree to disagree…it’s a harmonious relationship. Isn’t that simple? But apparently it is not. It seems that we ‘must’ enforce our thoughts on others, or once joined the ‘group’; we must protect the collective interest and promote the ideology. We are made to feel ‘threatened’ from ‘others’. Interestingly, this results in an action towards ‘others’ that ends up as a reaction from ‘others’ towards us, and the adversarial process continues. Sometimes these energies are manipulated by a few to serve their vested interests and results in tragedies…..at others, these movements become real success stories and actually form popular belief systems.

In a nutshell, our identity can only be defined and determined by our personal belief system. Associating with ‘categories’ may be an easy way to determine an identity, but may not be a well founded one.

Yes America, or any other place in the world, can be our home too. My concept of a home is where we find peace, love, respect, and security. Our home is where our individuality is preserved and our values flourish. Our home is where we cherish our dignity and relationships. Be it the confines of four walls, or defined by the boundaries of a country. It is an entity within itself that must be preserved else we become part of a cesspool that can only breed hate and enmity towards each other.

Naved

samina:

agreed. now to see what she will do with jhumpa lahiri`s the namesake.

my reference to ``anthony gonsalves`` was along the lines of words that make no sense on the surface and relating it to how what i posted may still not make sense here `on the surface`.

back to zehra`s article though, and her declarations. . . i think ``intentions`` were good, and again, digging deeper than what`s at the surface is perhaps where this is, but as more than one person has pointed out, clarity would have helped this somewhat. and her footnotes, in my opinion, are classic zehra ``in yo face`` but again, this might be mistaken for arrogance, and be at dissonance with her ``intentions.``

and i think my contribution here is done. . . for now.

naved

Someone should figure out (they must already have) why some people almost relish the constant enrichment of their identities, while others dread its very prospect.

Ana ji: Bhabian Therory of third space is based on what Bhabis of Ranjha told him before he left for Heer`s home town to graze buffalos and cows of her father. Bhabis basically told him that you have no sapce in ``our`` home and your father`s home is no more, so go find some space of your own - which in Bhabi`s view was Third Space for Ranjha.

Bhabian Theory of Third Space applies to beyond Ranjha and Jhang Sial. e.g. I am living in third space called America...so is Samina ji. other two spaces, one of ours and one of our parents became too small for us so we moved to the Third Space.

I believe by mentioning this theory in this context, Samina ji is telling Fatima ji to appreciate the third space rather than bad mouth it but I could be wrong, because sometimes it is very hard to translate Samina ji`s words into humanily understandable languages.
:)

F.Zehra,

Pragmatic and logical.

Ofcourse I agree with rozaiba and ferozk. The decision should be made after a lot of deliberation and then stuck to.

I too was confronted with the same choice. In the year 2000 (around the same time as you) I questioned the utility of Muslim identity. Since I never fancied living in the US, the identity I chose willfully was Pakistani and Pakistani alone (Club Human also appealed to me but I had become aware of the numerous nuances involved and couldn`t afford to be idealistic). To do justice to that I moved back.

The question of identity ofcourse has nothing to do with my own personal religious beliefs.

-YLH

PS: I still believe Irshad Manji is much more honest than MWU and PMU.

Re: # 31

To do justice to that I moved back.

.........You were probably thrown out.

Zehra

Very well written. Surprised to see some criticism to it.

At the end of the day, you belong to your family, your village, your river and your mountain.

This faith & nationality are hairy-fairy stuff, all in the air and imagination. Pick & choose what you like.

nhk

Whoa. Ok. Will take it page by page.

Samina, reply one:
I said some, not many of her ideas. I like her ideas about exploring islam. I like what she writes about Saudi adn the arab world feeling like they have some sort of monopoly over islam. i like the way she separates between culture and religion. to only site a few. i dont like how she talks about her book, i dont like at all how she talks about palestine and i dont like what she has written since in different newspapers. i think fame went ot her head and she had to kowtow in order to keep her current other spectrum face.

I only know satrapi from your list of iranians. Umm, do i think of myself in that political spectrum. I have an issue with iranians who left iran after the shah and how not muslim they want to be. its like anything that even smells muslim is awful. Satrapi to her credit, does not go that far. Her book is really awesome, i love it (the first one, not the second one). I like Azar Nafisi a lot. she could be counted in the same category as the ones u have mentioned. I dont know where i am politically. im in me own category i guess. its difficult to explain.

reply no.4: Naqshbandi: i like the idea of god. there are parts of islam i like, i would like to find a part of it that fits me, since it is what i grew up with and people i am close to really believe in it. i would like to udnerstand why and if there is a way for me to fit into it. I have a whole shia aspect and idealism that fits into my perosnal equation that i am trying to not bring into the conversation.


next page.
z.rizvi

Replies 5-15:

Kaalchakra: umm, ok. thanks for the kind words.

scout and miriamk: I am too political, too activist and too american to not htin about categories and labels and words like progressive. How can i not align myself with something in that states that i can see may or may not pan out into something really really freaking interesting? i will maintain that religion is a personal matter and i keep it that way. i dont answer questions about how many times i pray, fast etc. thats my business with my god. religion and politics are mixing though and i am a part of that. how can i not be?

theovangogh: HA HA HAHA. godo one. touche.

Hp: nicely said but dont u feel like that is just washing your hands off something and not paying attention to what is happeneing?

ana: It`s me talking out loud. its me trying to figure it out and laying it all out on chowk since it brings up good discussion. Somtimes one has to identify what something is NOT in order to identify it.

if that makes sense...

next...
z.rizvi

for the rest:
first, sorry for all the spelling mistakes. i am typing too fast. i pay for internet in Sri Lanka. by the minute!

ana and samina: great stuff. mera dil jeet liya since u are quoting amitabh and talking about suketu`s book (which is good stuff, i just wish he took a little bit more time and write it more...poetically? fluidly?).
the footnotes: stuff i wanted to say in the article but knew if i did, it would not be taken seriously but u know me...i like to have my cake and eat it too. im gonna have to get back to u on Homi. he makes my head spin. Spivak is no better. neither is appadurai. why cant our academics (im gonna appropriate homi) write clearly? the only two i love and can read properly are a. nandy and g. pandey.

naved and others: this is a comfortable stance to say religion is my business. i am the same way. As a politically active person living in America who was raised muslim and knows and loves practicing muslim, the private became public and very politically charged. i couldnt sit there and say allah allah khair sallah and let it just be. Does that make sense at all?

we cannot sit (I cannot) sit silently.
thanks all v. much for reading and dicussion.

z.rizvi.

The article is okay I guess.....

ana, and others.....please can you put down your gobbledegook is plain english. Its jibberish, and totally unintelligible.

#38 - ``is plain....``

---

> ``in plain.....``

#38 - ``is plain....`` => ``in plain.....``

////It does confirm as the whole world knows, Americans are far and by large, idiots. Idiot Americans, though a pleasant topic, is not up for discussion. ///

Poor Yanks...ever thought as to why should the average american be an intelligent....

Is the average Indian/Pakistani, from Islamabad/Peshawar/Karachi/lahore/Delhi/Bombay/lucknow/Madras....an intelligent chap?

If Americans are dumb for reelecting bush and swallowing the neo-con line on Iraq, what are we (?)..........consistent in electing various dynasties of Gandhis and Bhuttos and a whole bunch of idiots to accompany them.

Sometimes i think that we, and here i mean the English speaking South Asian elite, expects the average westerner to be as ``informed`` as the rest of us


Saying that ....a nice piece...am new to chowk and its writing like yours that provide a very interesting perspective on the ``other``.

#Ana and Samina

After one term paper on Bhabha (Location of cuulture)...i swore that i would never touch him again ....your exchange has brought the nightmares back......he and spivak are absolutely obtuse ..but i have found him to be extremely direct when he speaks ...

Appadurai: take a look at `` Modernity at large`` ....he is very readable and a great speaker.

i dont` know why people are taking the `idiot` comment to offense, it`s true, a country which votes for Bush, basically slamming the kulhari on their own foot, are a bunch of idiots

Zehra,

as an open minded American you DO have the choice to find your own identity instead of jumping the bandwagon of labels and as far as religion being personal, religion is not personal, it`s a collective entity, based on organization and as far as Islam is concerned, the Ummah

now your relationship with God is personal and has nothing to do with organized religion

i`m not trying to convert you into some bohemian free being, i just find your thoughts above somewhat superficial, like a teenage kid following the latest fashion trend.

Americans are far and by large, idiots.


So the pakis lining up outside the american embassy are volunteers who want to move here to raise the average IQ...how altrustic...

#26 by Saminasha on June 19, 2005 7:37pm PT


but I think Mira Nair is really engaging these issues,


Mira Nair who made Hysterical blindness....(almost) worst movie...ever...

would have been the worst if it wasn`t for uma thurman talking dirty for like 10 seconds...that scene put it way above(or below) lost in translation which is positively the worst movie ever made in any language....

i know it has been said before that identity has little to nothing to do with religious beliefs, but when asked by a professor to list all the things that he/she is (a verb indicating location, identity etc.), more than a few put down their religion as part of their identity. the pakistani passport, hellow, a big huge identification card in itself has us indicate what our religion is (and if we`re talking about idiots. . well. . ) as part of our identity.

it helps to make a distinction in this case between religion and faith. . .the two are used interchangeably, and have been, but there is a distinction to be made. and as an institutionalized system, a religion is what many identify with.

Where do we go from here? I have no clue

That about sums up the essay/article. This is a classic piece of navel gazing. As Hire Purchase or was it wheel of Time said keep the desire to seek guidance from religion to a minimum. Right and Wrong are not dependent on the tint of glasses you wear, they are independent. So piloting a plane loaded with people into big towers full of people is wrong (doesnot matter what religion you follow).

Re: # 46
Indentity at many levels. at the mundane level is what you suggest like religion, like your ID cards etc. These are mere administrative tools for pigeon holing people for administrative purposes.

On the other hand your identity is dependent on who you are : you principles in the first instance. And it is this, which in the form of your personality/character gets projected onto the society around you. It iis this which gnaws at you when something occurs which is opposite of what you think is right. Your Id card doesnot gnaw at your insides when something goes wrong e.g there are many pakistanis (all carryng the pakistani passposrt (id card)) who felt that it was wrong to pilot a plane into a building, just as they are many who rejoice.

polka dots #48

my giving the passport as an example was to indicate how people want to pigeon-hole us, and forgive me, but the asking for one`s religion in a passport (or even on an id card) is not done for administrative purposes. not in pakistan.

i appreciate your pointing out the obvious all the same. :)

#49 thanks you ana, just for the reply here
Roll out the barrel, We`ll have a barrel of fun
Roll out the barrel, we`ve got the blues on the run
Zing Boom Terrara
Join in a glass of good cheer
Now it`s time to roll the barrel
For the gang`s all here

*groan* i will remember never to call you polka dots again (even though i like polka dots), but if it inspires you to roll out that tune. . . LOL

#51 Polka Dots are nice. Ona totally different tac - I saw a guy wearing a pink shirt with white polka dots yesterday that really threw me of my stride as I was crossing the road near the Nat.Hist. Mus .....

Does everyone see why the word ‘identity’ is dangerously loaded and treacherously misleading when used to describe properties of human beings; why ‘attribute’ or ‘aspect’ would be a much better choice?

Some time ago, I wrote up an excruciating analysis of three different gradations – nominal, descriptive, prescriptive - in which personal attribute designators commonly appear. Masochists who wish to wade through a stultifying exercise in pedantry may
click here.

#54 you did enjoy giving that link didnt you Cantor_set_1? You are a sadist.......

alephnull:

it probably was masochistic and/or pedantic. i don`t see a whole lot of interactors responding to that, in agreement or disagreement.

identity is a loaded word. but so are a lot of words/objects etc. that we give meaning to. oh yeah we could use ``attribute``, ``qualities``, ``characteristics`` ``aspects`` -- all these synonyms, but at some point words, and language are just as treacherous as the humans who use it.

and if we were to use aspect, then obviously there are multiple aspects to us as persons, and those aspects can be nuanced as well. what then, i wonder, is the problem with using the word ``identity``? and as kaalchakra said, why do some of us relish in our constant enrichment of ``identities``, while some dread (i add deny) its very prospect.

oso #54

I knew that was coming. To answer your question – not particularly. These discussions tend to go round and round in circles. Classification tends to help me – your mileage may vary.

ana #55

The problem is that ‘identity’ indicates complete specification of an entity down to the last detail, indicates A = B. Look up the etymology. To say ‘my identity is X’ is to indicate that I am X first, last and foremost, nothing else and nothing but. So IMO ‘identity’ ought only to be used to refer to a person’s human totality, to the sum of all his or her characteristics and attributes. Different aspects ought never to be called ‘identities’ to avoid confusing the attribute with the totality. It’s fatal to have such a misleading word at the center of the debate.

Then of course there are those attributes that carry with them the assertion that they capture the person in every detail, aim to prescribe what his behaviour ought to be. Need I mention the worst offenders? This is where fascism begins.

Ana:
#55

Arey yaar baat yay hai labels just make me cringe. I’m all for learning about where we stand vis-à-vis certain issues i.e. religion, politics, abortion, etc. but the minute someone tries to box me in (as you have pointed out) as a result of my views, I always see that as a narrowing of my world. I don’t want to be called progressive because of my stance on one issue while on the next day called conservative because of my stance on another issue. Identity has to be something larger than that…..don’t you think?

#56 precisely - pigeon holes...you want to put everyone in some bin so that you can handle the situation. But these are collective properties we are talking about here. These collective properties only come about because we clutch to some form of an ideology ....

rather than using our principles to project our characteristic, we let the collective set be our descriptive. That is theissue here. The vision of leemings and cliffs comes to mind.

in #56 you say ``So IMO ‘identity’ ought only to be used to refer to a person’s human totality, to the sum of all his or her characteristics and attributes. Different aspects ought never to be called ‘identities’ to avoid confusing the attribute with the totality.``

This is often taken to its logical conclusion, when someone suggests that they are a muslim, or a hindu, or a tory, or a marxist. There seems to be a direct one-to-one map imposed on the collective of the individual`s characteristics, and the collective characteristics (attributes) of the bin.

This is why I extended the example of ana`s id (and passport) in #48

#58 - the first paragraph got chopped for some reason....

and let this ideology be first up in projecting our image. Hence, we are asked to uphold all of the basic tenets ofthat ideology. It could be possible that we, as individuals, subscribe to a subset of these collective characteristics. And that is the nub of the problem.

The overt collective is always the way forward in small backward societies. take the high way of the collective or you get socially lobotomised.

alephnull #56

i was thinking as i wrote my response to you that indeed identity is this amassing of attributes, aspects, and i can see where you`re coming from on this. but as dots pointed out, there is the issue of the collective. people are talking ``identity politics``. now thaaat is loaded. :)

i don`t know `bout the word ``totality`` there is a sense of finality to that. an absolute. if we are to say as you suggest that identity should only refer to a person`s ``human totality``, that seems to bring some closure when in my opinion, identity should be fluid, rather than fixed, and open rather than absolute.

but i don`t want to get into a circular argument here. perhaps we`re somewhat on the same page on this, and i`ve misunderstood your use of the word totality.

but yes, we do seem to hold one of these aspects up and use it to define the rest of us, as individuals which i have found problematic throughout my not-so-brief life. i understand how fascism begins. but then again, it has also been important in history, to focus on a particular aspect of a person`s identity, especially when that aspect in its collective has been dehumanized.

miriam #57

i know what you mean about this labelling business. i`ve struggled with it myself. does pro-choice mean pro-abortion and all that. i`ve marched with the ``pro-choicers`` but i am against abortion. to me, there is a difference. but you get labelled as one thing by one group and another thing by another. . . and i don`t know if you understand punjabi, but at some point it becomes a question of ``meiN keRay paasay jaawaaN, meiN manji kithay DaawaaN`` (with all apologies to the late munawwar zareef if i`ve misappropriated this) -- which roughly translates to ``in which direction should i head, where should i set my bed.``

labelling and putting in boxes involves to some extent this crapload of ``if you`re not for us. . .`` and that should not be. it is one thing for me to continually be vigilant of how christians are treated in pakistan. it is quite another for some pakistanis to understand me as saying that all non-christian pakistanis are against christians. it`s simply not the case. and the question of ``meiN keRay paasay jaawaaN`` needn`t come up, if we don`t treat our beliefs, our qualities, our attributes whatever the heck we want to call them as static things.

as usual i express myself badly on a monday morning on an empty stomach, but just wanted to tell you i hear you. we are like this only, and we are much more in ``this only``.

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

Re: # 33

No actually I wasn`t. I actually had a valid visa till recently and will be travelling back and forth to the United States... early next year. As a matter of fact I got my new MRP only today.

But nice try...

i wonder. . . as i wonder. . .

does the gentleman who refers to marginal margarine munaafiques usually have the mirror fixed on his bare ass as he spouts his proclamations.

or does he eat his own not so fruity TuTTi.

better yet, is a person who constantly refers to munaafiques as rundees, kanjaRRs and kanjaRRis, as birds of a feather who ``fcuk-fly`` together, is this person not a munaafique as well?

i think more than a few of us know the answer to that. . . so what the `ell, bring on the empty horses. . .

and while you`re at it, say a prayer. . . for yourself.

#61 by echoboom on June 20, 2005 10:35am PT

mullah boom-boom...i had a question for you about your copyrighted insult: gora goo chatter...

1. Is it abt a gora person chaating goo?
2. Is it about a person chaating gora goo..i mean is the goo white?
3. Is it about a person chatting a gora man`s goo?

#61 wahhabi mullah boom-boom loves his own tutti which could be fruity.

The man is in orbit and loves the land of marginal margarine, lives theres and chats the goo of the gora`s and yet insults them and otherslike him.

keep up the good work, chacha boom-boom, kya aapko chusni doone

arjun:

the first choice is OUT. dude it is either both 2. and 3. or one of those. wouldn`t be surprised if he thought gora goo was somehow different than his own. but please, he would be more than happy to discuss goo and connect it to this article. . . don`t encourage the mad ``munaafique!``

now that echoboom-boom has turned, watch the heat being turned on. Ana and arjun_m have set the ball rolling, this game is going to reach double hundred

Well, to Mr. Amir Saulat Jafri of Canada`s (aka Echoboom`s) attempts at parables:

Dr. Henry Louis Gates Jr., one of the foremost scholars of Af. Am. Lit points out in his stellar preface ``Talking Books`` to the Norton Anthology of African American Literature, that the belief systems, institutions and implementation of slavery resulted:

1. in a Black Aesthetic that was purely American and ALSO African
2. this Black Aesthetic was created through the innumerable narratives and experiences of ENslaved PEOPLE (Diaper Sahib, ``slave`` is an objectifying term)
3. Slavery tested the very principles of the Enlightenment; Phyllis Wheatley, A WOMAN and the first Af Am to publish in North America EMBODIED a profound refutation of white superiority notions
4. W.E.B DuBois, Jean Toomer, James Baldwin, Lucilled Clifton and Gwendolyn Brooks, all acknowledged masters writers call for a continued Black Aesthetic that is based on unflinching self interrogation-esp. in issues of gender, class, compulsive heterosexuality.
5. Black American writers have been alligned with literary movements world wide
6. Black American writers are constantly questioning the construct of ``authencity``.

Just for the record.

aRJUN

funnily enough my film studies friend says hysterical blindness is an accurate view of female self deception....

Zehra Sahiba,
Amen Sister.
It gives me a great deal of pleasure to read this article. I am with you, and so are lots of not very vocal Muslims.

This is our HOME. I agree wholeheartedly. Allah Bless America, One nation under Canada.

I am a Muslim. I vote ProChoice.

I am a Muslim. I am gay. I am not going to Hell and I will not let anyone tell me that I am. Last time I checked they werent sitting on the Throne of Allah.

I am a Muslim, an American and I wholeheartedly opposed the War in Iraq.

I am a Pakistani Muslim, and would I vote Republican. HELL NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hugs to you Zehra jee.
Khuda aap ko salamat aur bohat khush rakhey.

Re: Bhabi and Suleri

Suleri called for a more fluid examination of power in her critique of ``otherness``-particularly in Meatless Days. In describing the fluctuating reaches of agency performed by her fam, Suleri pointed out that power collects at certain institutional policy points and dictates the actual freedom citizens have.

Bhaba calls for a more precise reading of how identities are formed, are constantly evolving and power is negotiated-so that we dont have the easy binaries of good/bad, black/white, muslim/non muslim. He and scholars/artists like Anne Deavere Smith, Ann DuCille, Lynda Barry (a Pinay graphic artist) call for a more transnational understanding of identity politics and linkages.

queenie,

rest assured queen. i have no intentions of locking horns with the ``great master of deception`` known to us as farangi kush, ghalib zaman, hamzaad afaqui, chusni, echoboom, and all his other avatars including those ``rumored`` female ones. jahan tak mera khayal hai, he can partake of his own goo, and that of the goras he lives amongst wherever the heck he is in north america, and let that taste affect his own demons.

he is not the center of this article. but some of us call it as we see it, a pathetic twisted sap of munaafique himself. . . this coming from someone who has never denied her own hypocrisy, but to go as far as to call men and women kanjaRRs and rundees, who like him, live in this blessed hemisphere, oh, he`s got nerve. i`d say balls, but fortunately i can only say nerve.

i`ve fallen to the bait already. but heck, nice try at baiting some more.
ana

Well, comments like these:
especially if you are planning on responding to this article with all manner of idiotic comments.
Will encourage idiotic replies like mine, :S, sadly your article was not worth reading, it was incomplete, repetitive and poorly structured. What were u? A Political Science or Arts major. tsk tsk... Rather call this section `Zebra`s Crossing, move out of the way!`

Useless!!!
Depressed Anarchism usually gives rise to such surmises as your thoughts in this article. What surprises me is that what you postulate isn`t quite the case save an effort to shift a belief system to your extremely well thought of negative tropism. How could you not have seen this from the veil of your, shall we say, oeil perspicace!

...The echo is the call itself,
if you can solve the puzzle!

#69 by Saminasha on June 20, 2005 12:29pm PT


funnily enough my film studies friend says hysterical blindness is an accurate view of female self deception....


Now that you`ve put it this way, the hysterical blindness DVD has moved up on my list of christmas presents for guys on my goo list...

Re: # 74
What belief system?
Is there only one?
Is there only one Islam?
Is the Islam of Naqshbandis the same as the Islam of Devbandis?
Is the Islam of Indonesians the same as that of the Morroccans?
Is the Islam of Egyptians the same as that of Saudians?
Is there one Islam?

Why are you surprised?
We are not!

You and your kind who have abducted Islam to your own devices. You have made it a Chattel, a slave of your egos and perverted comprehensions.

There is no veil before your eyes. They are simply sealed shut.

arjun:

i should have thought kama sutra would have been up there already. *rolling eyes*. aap ka andaz aur, humara aur. different strokes for different folks. i could say i`m disappointed that you thought ``lost in translation`` was one of the worst movies ever made, but celluloid affects everyone differently.

and now i`m curious. what would you consider to be one of the best movies ever made?

p. s. mira nair rockssss! *whispers*

#77 by ana on June 20, 2005 1:32pm PT


i should have thought kama sutra would have been up there already.


KS..for the guys on my goo list?


and now i`m curious. what would you consider to be one of the best movies ever made?


Saving Private Ryan

ShoreSahib:
Do you happen to know the Hadith, where it is prophesied by the Great Prophet that the Ummah will be broken up into 73 sects But there will be only One sect which will be granted admission into Heaven - the 72 others -> Hell.

you can always discard Ahadith, ofcourse.

My question to you: Before asking Why this Islam or that islam, a rather more pertinent question to be asked is Why should a person buy into a belief system that talks about Hell and eternal condemnation for the deviant and infidels?

Ana, have you seen the following movies. They are my favorites:

Tampopo

Amorres Perros

Como Aqua para Chocolate

The Scent of Green Papaya

Raise the Red Lantern

Eat, Drink, Man, Woman

Before Night Falls

Fire

A touch of Pink

Bhaji on the Beach

a good list you got there, SS. (sorry if you take offense for the SS :-) )

Amorres Perroes had a lot going on.

Before Night Falls was a straight ripoff (imagery-wise) from Tarkovsky`s Andrei Rubilev.

cheers.

Re: # 79

RawDust Sahib:
You asked, ``My question to you: Before asking Why this Islam or that islam, a rather more pertinent question to be asked is Why should a person buy into a belief system that talks about Hell and eternal condemnation for the deviant and infidels?``

I have a theory that addresses the question you have posed. Humans because of their very fragile existence are morbidly afraid of the unknown. Death presents the most feared unknown. A belief system provides answers, a system of moralities and most of all; a comfort zone.

In my opinion, there is no physical place as Heaven or Hell. This earth is either like heaven or hell. On a more esoteric note, I must add, that to me Hell means a separation from the divine. I am firm believer in the Chandogaya Upanishada teaching that all creation stems from the infinite divine called Brahman in Sanskrit. This universal divine power is the primogenitor of the human soul in my opinion. After death, this tiny spark of the divine seeks to be united with the Ultimate divine power, and I consider nearness to this divine energy a source of bliss, or a state of heaven. On the other hand, the further away one`s soul is from the divine light, the more anguished and tortured one`s soul is, whether in this human life or the next life without matter; it is a state of hell.
Hell to me is simply an absence of the divine in one`s life.
One does not need to be a Muslim, a christian or any religion to have this divine light illuminating their lives. The sages of the Vedantic period had no religion, yet lived bathed in divine light of wisdom. Wisdom brings bliss and contentment. Ignorance brings anguish, fear and pride.

I didnt mean to go on an on. I didnt know how else to answer your question.

ShoreSahib:
many thanks for your reply. one of these days, i am gonna readup on vedas and upanishads.

Re: # 81
I am not taking offense at SS.

I grant thee permission to call me that. :))

I loved Amorres Perros. Great movie.

Have you seen, ``Requiem for a Dream``.

I would also urge you to see, `` Babette`s Feast``. Cest Magnifique, Monsieur.

shoresahib:

i have seen four of the movies you`ve mentioned. like water for chocolate, fire, raise the red lantern, and bhaji on the beach. fire was now when i think about it, much better than earth, all of these were good movies, although i know that gurinder chadha has been criticized for the dimensionality of her characters. but still, i think ``bhaji`` is a good movie in terms of the generational relationships, and the varying aspirations, conflicts of the women, and if memory serves me correctly, wasn`t one of the women characters actually from the mothership i. e. india herself and was seen as more ``outrageous`` by both the older and the younger women? that, if i`m not mistaken, was interesting. and if there are those who feel that the desi man was being stereotyped yet again. . . there are plenty of jerks around like the husband who beat his wife.

hopefully this will all flow and connect back to zehra in some way. . :)

arjun:

saving private ryan, i hear, was a good movie. would you believe, i haven`t seen it yet? okay, for a moment i thought you were going to give me a golan-globus movie, and if you had i would have freaked and concluded that you truly are a lost soul. (i guess unlike some others, i haven`t reached that conclusion yet. foolish me.)

I congratulate Ana, Raw_dust and ShoreSahib for hijacking this thread for a conversation that is best suited for UP.
I respect your taste in movies but none of them had any entertainment value. Why waste hours and money on movies that make you run out of theatres!
I cannot bear to watch them on DVD either.

HP:
i saw the list and couldnot resist commenting. apologies to the peeps - if that amounted to hijacking.
for the question of movies and entertainment - start a thread on UP if you really wanna, ill stop by sometime.

I read this piece as a desperate--often cheeky--attempt at an explanation of a dithering individual; and I take the term ``identity`` (thanks Alephnull) to be the crux of the cake, so to speak. In the end what is gained? Nothing. Beyond that nugatory meandering of an “identity-less” Muslim, then what? I`m lost; and by implication, so is Zehra. And cheap shots against America don’t highlight the ‘progressiveness’ of this new Muslim intelligentsia.

--Ibn

I read this piece as a desperate--often cheeky--attempt at an explanation of a dithering individual; and I take the term ``identity`` (thanks Alephnull) to be the crux of the cake, so to speak. In the end what is gained? Nothing. Beyond that nugatory meandering of an “identity-less” Muslim, then what? I`m lost; and by implication, so is Zehra. And cheap shots against America don’t highlight the ‘progressiveness’ of this new Muslim intelligentsia.

--Ibn

Re: # 76
perverted comprehensions

LoL, Shore, you seriously are screwed in the head... Refering to the #70 post you made... you said:

I am a Muslim. I am gay. I am not going to Hell and I will not let anyone tell me that I am. Last time I checked they werent sitting on the Throne of Allah.

Damn, whos the pervert now... :S For one, Allah needs no throne, theek... if you cry democracy and freespeech all the time, be ready to listen to some shit like going to hell. Lets not be hypocritical at the same time, ok?

I, myself am all cool with who you vote for, thats your right, coz you must have made a wise decision doing so. Or not doing the otherway round. But please refrain from accusing others of hijacking Islam, when you yourself dont have a good grasp of it. And in the same ignorance attempt hijacking it for your own good.

The stuff about ONE ISLAM, in your post, really doesnt stick out, what is it about ?!

The most admirable of all this could be the activism amongst minorities, like Muslim in the US, all working to get their rights.

Goodnight.

#85 by ana on June 20, 2005 2:19pm PT



saving private ryan, i hear, was a good movie. would you believe, i haven`t seen it yet?


Try Mr and Mrs Smith....it`s True lies with two pairs of balls....


okay, for a moment i thought you were going to give me a golan-globus movie,


Hey...what`s wrong with Superman II?



that you truly are a lost soul.


heck, my nani thinks i`m a lost soul, destined for that barbecue in hell....are you a practicing catholic?

HP:

arre, i had no intentions of ``hijacking`` the board but i very well couldn`t ignore the question now could i? and plus talking about the content of some of these movies isn`t completely divorced from the issues zehra`s footnoted.

vaisay, not to ``hijack`` any further, but do you read, write and speak sindhi? if so, i`ve come across some sindhi poems and i have just a few questions. okay, maybe one.

arjuna:

naah. greek orthodox. and not much of a truly practicing one these days.
and superman ii is good! chillax!

re: ShoreSahib # 82

One doesn`t know what to say when one sees Vedanta being combined with Islam-1 to create Islam-2.

Hopefully, one day someone will explain what Islam-2 has to do with Islam-1.

zeh`r with apologies for this intrusion:

Please circulate widely.

PRESS CONFERENCE
June 22, 2003

10:30 a.m – 12:30 p.m.

65th Street, Fifth Ave., New York



A press conference will be held on Wednesday June 22, 2005 at 10:30 a.m at 65th Street and Fifth Ave. in Manhattan. The press conference is being sponsored by ANAA (Asian American Network Against Abuse of Women), Turning Point for Women and Families NY and Amnesty International, USA.

The press conference is being held to urge the Pakistani government to allow Mukhtaran Bibi to travel and speak freely within and outside Pakistan. Representatives of ANAA, Turning Point, Amnesty International, Human Rights First will address the conference along with other well known rights advocates.

As has been widely reported in the international media, Mukhtaran Bibi endured the harrowing tragedy of being sentenced to rape by a tribal jirga, maligned by her community and yet emerged courageous and committed to improving the society around her. Tragically, she is now refused the right to speak the truth about her ordeal while all the men who raped Mukhtaran Bibi are now free.

Mukhtaran Bibi was put under house arrest on June 9 only to be spirited away for a day and reproduced at a Press Conference organized by government officials. In the Press Conference she stated that she was foregoing her invitation to the United States to attend the ANAA Symposium on Violence against Women in South Asia. In the mean time, while Pakistani government officials maintain she is ``free to leave``, police continue to surround her house and monitor all telephone conversations. In addition, Mukhtaran Bibi`s passport has been taken and is no longer in her possession. Victimized first at the hands of a tribal jirga and gang raped by twelve men, Mukhtaran Bibi has now been made to believe that telling her story and bringing attention to the plight of women like herself would make her ``an enemy of Pakistan.``

ANAA is deeply disappointed at the Pakistan Government`s efforts to thwart a public advocacy campaign that aims to draw attention to thousands of women in Pakistan who are regularly brutalized that result from a collusion between discriminatory laws, a patriarchal society and an establishment that fails to implement legislative and social reforms that would end the brutalization of women. We call on the Government of Pakistan to immediately ensure that those charged with the brutal crime will not endanger Mukhtaran Bibi or her family and will be brought to justice.

The legal, physical and psychological intimidation Mukhtaran Bibi has faced in recent days as a result of her desire to come to the United States is an example of the extreme lack of value placed on women lives and well being in Pakistan. It also illustrates the repressive silence imposed on all victims of sexual violence

Together with Amnesty International, Turning Point, community and religious leaders and a range of women`s advocacy and human rights organizations, we urge every one to join us in our efforts to ensure the safety of Mukhtaran Bibi and exert pressure on the Government of Pakistan to desist from their pressure tactics on her and her family, including granting Mukhtaran Bibi the freedom to speak and travel.

Contacts:
Amna Buttar
ANAA
Tel: 608-658-7866
abbuttar@aol.com

Robina Niaz,
Turning Point
Tel: 917-575-8069
Email: gardenia02@earthlink.net

Sheila Dauer,
Amnesty International
Tel: 212/807-8400
Email: sdauer@aiusa.org

Re: # 93
I am not the first one to do it.
Baba Farid did it. Baba Bulhey Shah as well. Nizam Ud din awliya, yes I think so. Salim ud din Chishti ofcourse. Baba Bhit Shah, yes indeed.

Guru Nanak as well.
It has been done before. I am simply the parrot reciting philosophy. Not my original thoughts about combining Vedanta with Islam.

It can be done. It has be done.

Seek Knowledge even if you have to go to China. Well, India is in the way.

:))

Re: # 86
Thou shalt not cast your pearls before Swine.

The Holy Bible

Re: # 90
Dear Sir,
I would refer you to Ayah Al Kursi.

You calling me a pervert, does not make me one. You can say whatever you wish, you have the right. I shall not be the fullfilment of your ideas of me. Never.
You may condemn me to Hell you want, so be it.
But you will taste death just like I would. Let our God be our judge.
It is the hell of your creation, and May you never experience it.

Peace upon you.

God is Truth.
God is Love.
God is Peace.


Om Shanti, Shanti, Shanti hi.

re: ShoreSahib # 95

I have been saying the same thing. All these gentlemen, that Hindus mistakenly respect, spread Islam-1 in India by talking of Islam-2.

What we are waiting to learn what Islam-2 has to do with Islam-1 :)

By the way, I used to provoke brother temporal by calling him a Hindu, which upset him greatly. Islam-2 very soon degenerates into Islam-1 sensibility.

Re: # 98
I am confused. What do u mean by Islam 1 and Islam 2. Describe them please. I have an idea about what you mean, and I am confused. Please clarify.
:)

#98:

By the way, I used to provoke brother temporal by calling him a Hindu, which upset him greatly. Islam-2 very soon degenerates into Islam-1 sensibility.

as iqbal said:
such kehdooN aye Brahmin gur tu bura na maanay
t’ray sanam kudON kay boo’t hoga’aye haiN puranay

correction: not provoke…irritate

...app srif kehtay haiN sunntay nahin (you state do not listen)....you have been here for a few years (other nicks included) and surely you know where i stand…am engaged in an uphill and seemingly unending strive to become an insaan first…as a prelude to become a muslim…just to refresh read the 05/06/19 entry from pehlay insaan onwards…

---

ss:

since you know urdu let me share something from an incomplete poem…

boo’t hO, khuda hO
sach hO, jhoot hO
tum hO ya woh hO
afratafri o badhawasi
ka hay raj
her soo aaj

boo’t to boo’t hee thehray
yeh kaisi ras’m chali hay
kay her insaaN
khuda hu’a chahta hay
oos khud saakhta khud