Mukhtaran Mai vs. the Rest of Pakistan

AlephNull,

the explanation you seek is in fact very simple as opposed to comprehensive. One must start with basics which I advise you to do. Simply ponder:

1. the meaning of: There is no god but Allah, and Mohammad is His messenger.
2. what is the purpose of your existence?
3. what’s next after this life?
4. then read Quran, the life of the Prophet (PBUH)

It would be helpful for you if you don’t compare it to any other religion or ideology and maintain impartiality in the beginning to prevent muddling of your thoughts.

I hope you possess the objectivity and fortitude to do the above, in which case I wish you Good luck. Otherwise …well, good luck anyways since no one can instill the two in your mind.


dost-mitter,

I’m sorry you’ve been misled by some ill-informed Muslims as per ``Time and again, we have been told that quran is a simple document and that anyone can read and understand its message without the help of a Maulana.``

While the basic tenets of Islam are crystal clear in the Quran. However, there are a lot of things that require knowledge of the background as to when the specific verse(s) were revealed to the Prophet (pbuh); or the interpretation provided by the Prophet (PBUH) in order to understand them. In my personal opinion it was necessary because otherwise there would not be a need for a prophet - men, but most guided ones - to lead the people.

Even in case of prayers – Salah, not just invocation and supplication – and pilgrimage (Hajj), the procedure is not explained in the Quran. One has to follow the Prophet (PBUH) to perform these acts properly.

Some ill-informed Muslims reject the Traditions (actions/ sayings) of the Prophet (PBUH) on the basis that they were written 200 years after his death. While the time period is correct, these Traditions were not grabbed out of thin air. Since the day Prophet (PBUH) received the first revelation, everything he said and did was recorded by his companions (may Allah be pleased with them). Still, at the time of the compilation, each of the Traditions were verified as much as possible along with the references, names, and lineages of the narrators. Wherever these verification are weak, the traditions are rendered ‘weak/unauthentic’. Most of the weak traditions are the ones that conflict with the Quranic injuctions and Shar`ia.

Speaking of Shar`ia, with all due respect I disagree with Romair on the definition of the word. Perhaps he`s confusing Shar`ia with Fiqh (jurisprudence). Furthermore, Shar`ia is not just the legal code for the judiciary. It is the comprehensive way of life as prescribed by Allah and lived by the Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) - a concept that AlephNull finds difficult to understand for now.

Anyway, some of the best references you can find to understand the Quran in its entirety are translation by Yusuf Ali, commentary by Ibn Katheer, as well as the traditions of the Prophet (PBUH) by Sahih Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, and Sahih Tirmidhi.

Good luck.

ntsyed :-)~~

dost mittar,

..... i hope you realize that according to the believers, which include soft-shoeing apologists like mr tahmed, islam cannot be separated from politics .............. only advani buys that line !

.......... look, theoretically it might be possible to come up with a new and improved islam that is more tolerant and less totalitarian, but as things stand now it is a pipe dream ........it might be possible in a hundred - maybe two hundred - years, but at this point islam is going through a ``revival`` that seeks to propagate a rather horrible and virulent strain of religion that is at odds with the rest of mankind ........... people like tahmed don`t count ............

.......... let`s hope that the human spirit, wich is decent at its core, will prevail over this cult of death and destruction ............

on Jay:
Jay was thrashed a few days back on Bina Shah`s board. His skepticism on the trend-for-the-good-in-Pak. being presented in that article was more in line with the reality, i guess. Sadly but quite expectedly he was right on the HR situation in Pakistan.

AlephNull:
I was responding basing my reply on the assumption of the Immutability of Quranic word. I figure, you are talking about something bigger that involves histories, cultures and the way the social forces work to propagate certain belief systems and let others die. I got nothing to say as i know very little about history and sociology etc.


cheers.

Re: # 97 by sattar2

LOL.... are you for real? Or are you still suffering from severe dyslexia?

Firstly, you need to make up your mind whether you believe in the Quran or you don`t. Selective belief in any system or any thing doesn`t work. Please read chapter 33 (Al-Ahzab) to see why Mirza Ahmed cannot be a prophet. I could give you the exact verse number too, but I`d rather you read the whole thing yourself to understand the context. I hope you`re brave enough to do that?

Secondly, could you please refresh my memory when I said ``Quran can demand that under certain circumstances it may be ok to kill people for following other faiths``?

Perhaps it`s your faulty memory or a vengeful desire to pick an argument with me even when you don`t have to.

In any event, let me refresh YOUR memory: I said when apostates, unbelievers and disbelivers from amongst polytheists and/or people of the books threaten the Muslim community, then he/she SHOULD BE, not may be, killed. I hope you remember the Banu Quraiza affair during the Battle of the Confederates, a.k.a Battle of the Trench.

As for ``what’s wrong with raping other women under certain circumstances``, if Quran sanctioned such an act, then unlike you I`d either do it or would not be a Muslim. It`s as simple as that.

If Islam did sanction it, the maulvi who was the first to help MM with his public protest against this injustice would not have been able to justify his protest, would he? Not to mention, what would happen to the Ahmedi women as per Sura Al-Ahzab that I referred to you above? Because Ahmedis clearly violate the `seal of the prophet` commandment in that chapter and practice a faith other than Islam, don`t they?

For your own good, please learn to understand the context before you engage in a debate. Unless of course, you`ve become addicted to having your foot in your mouth.

Ciao,
ntsyed :-)~~

Re: # 56

hamidm2,

Your humanity is commendable, as Allah loves the ones who forgive. But you see, there`s a tiny problem with your stance: it`s unrealistic and unpractical.

1. Are you equating a murderer, even if he`s a ``pedophilic mullah``, to an unborn and an absolutely innocent human being?

2. While no one has a right to kill anyone, when a person kills anyway, what happens to the rights of the victim and his/her survivors?

Just so you know, according to a report back in late 80s in the US, the cost of incarceration per inmate in a maximum security prison was around 40K/year - taxpayers` money. I imagine the number has gone up since then.

Now tell me, if you were the victim, would you have your survivors fund the extended incarceration of your murderer and on gitmo expansion? Or would you rather they spent it on their well-being?

What if you were the only bread-winner of the family, and your family depended on welfare after you were killed?

Would you have the taxes you paid while you were alive go towards keeping your murderer alive or the welfare of your survivors?

meray bhai/chaha/mamu/dost...there are limits to everthing, including our capacity to think; especially stupidity that you demonstrate here with blind arrogance. That`s why we seek knowledge from experts of different disciplines, and for spirituality these experts happen to be God and prophets. So think before you question/discredit ANY one; and think hard and long because you may not get the answer right away. No need to be embarrassed about it, because that`s how all of us are.

Executing MM`s rapists could prevent so many other such rapes, while just putting them away creates many other problems for the society at large. But for some reason, I don`t think it`ll ever make sense to you, as you seem to be pretty high on yourself.

ciao

Romair,

Wonderful posts - most objective and thorough.

ntsyed :-)~~

Re: # 143 Romair

``If tomorrow, someone presents his version of a Shariah to me, and tries to force me to follow his definition of what Muhammad wants me to do, or God wants me do (for that matter). I can definitely tell him, “to go suck a cactus.” As can you………… ``


Very well, lets put your conviction to the test.

The following lines comprise the Chapter 105 -``The Elephants`` in the Qura`n. Help me understand what they mean using your own ``Sharia`` and how did you reach to the explanation that you figured ot. Please keep in mind that asking my immigration status and whether I paid my last years taxes or not in response, is not a valid answer.


``105: 1-5
Have you not considered how your Lord dealt with the possessors of the elephant?

Did He not cause their war to end in confusion,

And send down (to prey) upon them birds in flocks,

Casting against them stones of baked clay,

So He rendered them like straw eaten up?

dost_mittar #125

{{I wouldn`t single out Islam.}}

I readily concede that the properties I’m interested in are not unique to Islam, particularly if we consider the broad sweep of human history. I’m interested in a comprehensive explanation for these phenomena and why they are such a prevalent part of the human condition. Stated most generally, ‘my’ explanation would say that they are rooted in biology. They result from a vulnerability of the human mind that is an unavoidable negative consequence of something inherent to human nature and essential to our survival – in the same way that human susceptibility to viral infections is an unavoidable consequence of the workings of the molecular machinery of life.

I focus on Islam, among other reasons, because it is by far the most prevalent and virulent example of a dogmatic religious ideology currently endemic in large populations. Moreover the opinions of believing Muslims and of people brought up in an atmosphere of Islamic religious brainwash are readily observable on Chowk, and particularly on this board, where there is no shortage of hilarious if pathetic examples.

{{The heart of the problem is the concept of blasphemy and this concept was not invented by the prophet of Islam.}}

There are at least four salient characteristics of Islam that put it on a collision course with liberal democracy. They are (1) supremacy of ‘revelation’ (2) assertion of finality/perfection (3) refusal to compartmentalise (4) attitudes to ‘blasphemy’ and ‘apostasy’. They are all central to the problem – it’s not just blasphemy.

Let me comment on ‘refusal to compartmentalise’ because striking though it is, it hasn’t received the attention it warrants. It manifests in several ways:

(1) - in the the claim that the religion is a complete way of life, that it has something relevant to say about most any aspect of human existence.
(2) - in the attitude that the ideas, notions that make up the religion are inseparable from individual believers or the community of believers – that an attack on or criticism of the religion is also a frontal attack on the community of believers and on the person of each believing individual, and that it needs to be opposed tooth and nail.
(3) - in the refusal to concede that a person might have the desire or even the ability to draw distinctions between the notions of the religion, on one hand, and those unfortunate human beings who are its victims, on the other.

You can easily observe these aspects of refusal to compartmentalise, on Chowk. The last sixty or seventy interacts on this board provide ample, if hilarious, evidence, from the usual suspects. (2) and (3) are most readily observed. There are also amusing instances of people who may claim not to believe (1) but who just cannot resist interjecting asinine remarks on the lines of “and this is also in accord with the essence of the Quran” at every opportunity.

The question still remains: how did all this come about? How did these bizarre collections of dogma and totally unsupportable belief come to infect huge human populations and persist for centuries or millenia? What is the comprehensive explanation?

Romair:

I am beginning to sound like a broken record but I come back to the question of religion and people.

The last time a case of Sati was reported in India was more than a decade ago. But can anyone say that it is disallowed in the Hindu religion? the last time I saw a temple where human sacrifices were performed was the film, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, still can anyone say that human sacrifice is prohibilted in Hindu religion? Hindu widows are remarrying all the time, but can anyone say that widow remarriage is not disallowed in that religion? Christians are mocking Jesus all the time on national TV, does it mean that it is not a blasphemy to do so in that religion? Just because practices have changed does not mean that what was there in the religion has changed.

You keep on saying that I have not given any proof whereas I have quoted from the quran to you on both counts (and I have no wish to repeat such things). In any case, I never said that Quran says that you could go out and kill non-believers or rape their women without rhyme or reason; that was your interpretation. You are right, even Urstruly - specially Urstruly - would not agree with that because he believes sharia to be the highest form of humanist code.

Your stance that one has to get an expertise on Islam to comment upon it is also not valid. Time and again, we have been told that quran is a simple document and that anyone can read and understand its message without the help of a Maulana. That`s exactly what I have done.

aqaris:

[Now If I would say..... Based on the BOOK MahaBharat ..... which is the story of
a WAR..... that it is allowed In Hinduism to KILL ..... even if it is your own cousin.
that is of the same religion.......( ...... I am sure many learned and those who know the content of Mahabharat ...can dig out such a content from It.... )....]

Question :- Where would I end UP....??``

You will end up being right!

ALL (except Turkey and a couple in SE Asia) mulsim countries call themselves ISLAMIC states. ISLAM is in their EVERY fabric of life - including the government, state, army, and JUDICIAL system. The atrocities and crimes committed in Darfur is also under the ISLAMIC banner. ALMOST ALL muslims haven`t said a word against such. Mukhtar Mai`s case is the FAILURE or ISLAMIC state. or a SHARIA.


Keeping the above in mind, WHAT is a non muslim supposed to conclude.

---

The message of Gita, is to perform DUTY - even if the duty requires killing cousins who are evil. A noble message indeed that the world can learn from.


PS. the justice failure happens inevery state including India. It is not due to a religious based failure.

aquaris #148: thank you for confirming and adding to the point I was trying to make. It is indeed incredible that this simple and obvious point has been missed by otherwise intelligent people on this board who are intent on blaming religion for everything.

Re: # 147
`` How about if I said that mukhtaran mai was assaulted because the perpetrators thought they could get away with it. And the reason they thought they could get away with it is because of weak implementation of criminal law in Pakistan. Which would put the blame on the government in power in Pakistan. Starting at the top, with musharaff.
``

... yes I think that is the exact reason.......

.... A Failed Justice System.....

Other wise how would you explain..... The president of Pakistan Personally on TV..
Defending .....an alleged Rapist ( The Famous Dera Bugti Captain )......with out trial..
By passsing ..... even their own military Laws....and its procedures....which they are supposed to follow ....in case of such allegations....

aquaris #146 How about if I said that mukhtaran mai was assaulted because the perpetrators thought they could get away with it. And the reason they thought they could get away with it is because of weak implementation of criminal law in Pakistan. Which would put the blame on the government in power in Pakistan. Starting at the top, with musharaff.

Would that make more sense than saying ``islam made them do it``??

Re: # 145


..... Let me point out My self....

I would look stupid and a moron.... who is quoting out of context.....

right....??

Interesting .... very interesting.....

........At least it is there..... Muslim are BAD because their religion allows.....Killing/raping/looting plundering....etc..etc..etc......and.......etc......
as it is in their BOOK....

....WELL WELL I wonder..... What is Mahabharat or Ramayana.....
to me At least Mahabharat is an epic ..... a pretty heavy TALE or WARS....
between COUSINS ( Kauru / Pandu )......and also a book which roughly defines..
the way Hindus should Live....

Now If I would say..... Based on the BOOK MahaBharat ..... which is the story of
a WAR..... that it is allowed In Hinduism to KILL ..... even if it is your own cousin.
that is of the same religion.......( ...... I am sure many learned and those who know the content of Mahabharat ...can dig out such a content from It.... )....

Question :- Where would I end UP....??